/^_  f 


LIBRA.RY 


Theological    Seminary, 

PRINCETON,    N.  J. 


I 


:.        ■'       y    ^- 


% 


I- 


f'>. 


PRIMITIVE 

TRUTH  AND  ORDER 

VINDICATED    FROM 

MODERN  MISREPRESENTATION: 

WITH 

A  DEFENCE  OF  EPISCOPACY, 

PARTICULARLY    THAT    OF 

SCOTLAND, 

AGAINST    AN    ATTACK    MADE    ON    IT 

BY  THE  LATE  DR.  CAMPBELL,  OF  ABERDEEN, 

IN    HIS 

LECTURES  ON  ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORT. 


BY  THE  RIGHT  REV.  JOHN  SKINNER, 

IN  ABERDEEN,    SENIOR  BISHOP  OF  THE  SCOTCH  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 


THE  FIRST  AMERICAN  EDITION. 

To  which  is  annexed, 

A  REVIEW  OF  DR.  HAWEIS'  CHURCH  HISTORY. 


PSjyTED  AND  SOLD  BY  T.  ^  J.  sfV^^DcH  HBUi^^^'*'^  ^ 

1808.  ^'^^f^nmK'^-^'' 


No.  160  Psarl-Strect. 


ADVERTISEMENT 
TO  THIS  EDITION, 

1  HE  original  edition  of  this  work  contained 
a  short  "  Address  to  the  Episcopalians  of  Scot- 
land." As  this  address  derives  its  principal 
interest  from  the  local  circumstances  of  the 
Church  in  that  country,  the  publishers  have 
omitted  it;  and  they  have  subjoined  a  very 
able  Review  of  Dr.  Haxveis'  Church  History, 
extracted  from  the  Anti-Jacobin  Magazine, 
which,  they  think,  will  enhance  the  value  of 
the  volume. 


THE  FOLLOWING  WORK,  IN  VINDICATION 

OF 

PRIMITIVE  TRUTH  AND  ORDER, 

IS  MOST  RESPECTFULLY  INSCRIBED 
TO  THE  HONOURABLE 

SIR  WILLIAM  FORBES,  BARONET, 

OF  PITSLIGO; 

BOTH  AS  A  GRATEFUL  ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

OF  HIS  EXERTIONS  IN  THE  SAME  CAUSE, 

AND 

AS  A  HUMBLE  TESTIMONY 

OF  THAT  SINCERE  REGARD  FOR  HIS  PUBLIC  VIRTUES, 

AND  NO  LESS  AMIABLE  CHARACTER 

IN  PRIVATE  LIFE, 

WHICH  HAS  BEEN  LONG  AND  DEEPLY  IMPRESSED 

ON  THE  MIND  OF 

HIS  MUCH  OBLIGED,  OBEDIENT, 

AND  VERY  FAITHFUL  SERVANT, 

THE  AUTHOR. 


CONTENTS, 


Introduction^  Page  9 — -25 

Chapter  I. 

The  Christian  Religion^  beings  like  its  Divine  Author^ 
"  the  same  yesterday  ^  to-day,  and  for  ever^''  ought 
to  be  received  and  embraced^  just  as  it  is  represented 
and  held  out  in  the  Scriptures  of  Truth,  *'  without 
adding  thereto,  or  diminishing  from  it^^  2r— 88 

Chapter  II. 

The  Church  of  Christ,  in  which  his  Religion  is  received 
and  embraced,  is  that  spiritual  Society,  in  xvhich  the 
Ministration  of  holy  Things  is  committed  to  the  three 
distinct  Orders  of  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons, 
deriving  their  Authority  from  the  Apostles,  as  those 

Apostles  received  their  Commission  from  Christ,  89 ^258 

Chapter  III. 

A  Part  of  this  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church, 
though  deprived  of  the  Support  of  Civil  Establish- 
ment, does  still  exist  in  this  Country,  under  the  Name 
of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Churchy  whose  Doctrine, 
Discipline,  and  Worship,  as  happily  agreeing  with 
that  of  the  first  and  purest  Ages  of  Christianity, 
ought  to  be  steadily  adhered  to,  by  all  xvho  profess  to 
be  of  the  Episcopal  Communion  in  this  Part  of  the 
Kingdom,  259 — 340. 

Appendix,  containing  List  and  Letters  of  Consecra- 
tions, and  Articles  of  Union,  341—350 

Extract  from  the  Review  of  Primitive  Truth  and  Or- 
der, contained  in  the  Anti-Jacobin  Magazine,  exhi- 
biting a  Reply  to  Dr,  CampbelVs  Commentary  on  the 
Words  of  Ignatius — '^  There  is  but  one  Altar  as 
there  is  but  one  Bishop,"  351— 35^ 

A  Review  of  Haw e is*  Church  History,  in  which  the 
Errors  and  Misrepresentations  of  that  Work  are  de- 
tected and  exposed,  c^55 — ^\  4 


IN^rRODUCTION. 


J.F  there  be  any  one  truth,  in  embracing  which  it  might 
be  supposed  that  the  intelligent  part  of  mankind  would  uni- 
rersaily  agree,  it  is  surely  the  importance  of  religion,  and 
the  necessity  of  attending  to  what  it  recommends,  for  pro- 
moting the  interests  of  society  on  earth,  as  well  as  prepar- 
ing men  for  the  happiness  of  heaven.  Viewing  the  matter 
in  this  light,  it  is  impossible  but  that  every  serious  think- 
ing person,  who  wishes  well  to  his  country,  must  sincerely 
lament  the  unhappy  divisions,  which  have  so  long  a^-itated 
the  public  mind,  on  a  subject  so  interesting  as  the  nature 
and  tendency  of  true  religion.  However  justifiable  sepa- 
ration may  be  in  some  cases ;  and  however  necessary  at  all 
times,  for  the  friends  of  truth  and  righteousness  to  with- 
draw themselves  from  the  tents  of  error  and  ungodliness; 
still  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  numerous  sects  and  parties 
into  which  the  Christian  world  has  been  divided,  and  their 
almost  endless  diversity  of  religious  opinions,  must  be  con- 
sidered as  one  of  the  heaviest  calamities  with  which  man- 
kind have  ever  been  visited.  Nor  need  we  be  at  much 
pains  to  point  out  this  wild  variety  of  sentiment  respecting 
the  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  as  the  most  common  source  of 
infidelity,  and  most  powerful  support  of  irrellgion;  since 
we  find  it  daily  appealed  to  as  such,  and  therefore  industri- 
ously  encouraged  by  those  **  perverse  disputers,"  who,  ra- 
ther than  embrace  the  ''  pure  undefiled  religion"  of  Christ, 
allow  themselves  to  be  completely  *'  spoiled  through  philo- 
sophy and  vain  deceit." 

Nothing  seems  to  be  better  known,  nor  more  carefully 
improved,  by  the  adversaries  of  our  common  faith,  thaa 


no  JtNTRODUCTIONi 

the  advantage  they  derive  from  those  unhappy  disscntiuns, 
by  which  the  family  of  Christians,  which  an  Apostle  calls 
the  "  Household  of  faith,"  is  divided  against  itself.  In  la- 
menting the  effects  of  such  shameful  division,  the  church  o^ 
Christ  may  justly  say,  in  the  words  of  the  Psalmist, — "  It 
is  not  an  open  enem)^  that  hath  done  me  this  dishonour ; 
but  even  those  who  were  once  my  companions,  who  took 
flweet  counsel  together  with  me,  and  walked  in  the  house 
of  God  as  friends."  Such  "  offences,"  however,  we  are 
assured,  "  must  needs  come ;"  even  although  a  ''  woe  be  de- 
nounced against  those  by  whom  they  come."  We  are  also 
forewarned,  that  there  must,  and  will  be  heresies,  factions 
and  parties  distinguished  by  their  false  and  destructive 
principles  j  "  that  they  who  are  approved"  by  their  steady 
adherence  to  truth,  unit}^  and  order,  "  may  be  made  mani- 
fest."— Such  then  being  the  divided  state  of  what  is  called 
the  Christian  World,  those  who  have  promoted  the  pre- 
sent w^ork  do  not  hope  to  produce  any  thing  like  general 
unanimity  in  a  country  such  as  this,  where  so  many  jarring 
opinions  are  entertained  on  the  subject  of  religion. — The 
object  which  they  have  in  view  is  of  less  extent,  and  there- 
fore more  likely  to  be  accomplished.  The  design  of  this 
publication  is  to  offer  some  arguments  in  defence  of  Episco* 
pacy  in  general,  and  particularly  that  of  Scotland ;  and  to 
persuade  such  of  the  inhabitants  of  this  country  as  profess 
to  be  of  the  Episcopal  Communion,  to  walk  worthy  of  that 
profession,  by  acting  in  a  manner  consistent  with  it,  and 
endeavouring  to  support  the  constitution,  and  preserve  the 
unity  of  that  small  remnant  of  the  old  established  church, 
which  still  happily  exists  in  this  part  of  the  united  kingdom. 
There  is  no  article  of  the  Christian  faith,  as  laid  down  in 
our  public  creeds,  that  seems  to  be  so  strangely  misunder- 
stood, and  so  little  attended  to,  as  that  in  which  we  are; 
taught  to  profess  our  belief  of  the  "  holy  catholic  church." 
And  the  mistakes  and  inattention  so  prevalent  with  regard 
to  this  important  article  are  the  more  to  be  regretted,  as  the 


INTRODUCTION.  U 

baneful  consequences  arising  from  this  unhappy  cause  do 
daily  exhibit  an  increasing  tendency  to  disorder,  confu- 
sion, and  every  evil  work.  It  is  no  doubt  by  preserving 
the  bonds  of  ecclesiastical  unity,  that  Christians  are  to  be- 
kept  in  the  way  of  obedience  to  the  one  God,  and  depen- 
dence on  the  one  Mediator.  It  has,  therefore,  been  justly 
observed  by  an  eminent  writer,  that,  "  if  ever  this  subject 
of  the  church  of  Christ,  now  so  much  neglected,  and  al- 
most forgotten  by  those  who  are  most  concerfted  to  under- 
stand it,  should  come  to  be  better  considered,  there  would 
be  more  ti'ue  piety,  and  more  peace,  more  of  those  virtues 
which  will  be  required  in  heaven,  and  which  must  there* 
fore  be  first  learned  upon  earth.  Some  amongst  us  err, 
because  they  know  not  the  Scriptures ;  and  others,  be- 
cause they  never  considered  the  nature  of  the  church. 
Some  think  they  can  make  their  own  religion,  and  so  they^ 
despise  the  word  of  God,  and  fall  into  infidelity.  Others 
think  they  can  make  their  o^vn  church,  or  even  be  a  church 
unto  themselves  ;  and  so  they  fall  into  the  delusions  of  en- 
thusiasm, or  the  uncharitableness  of  schism." 

These  are  the  pertinent  remarks  of  a  learned  divine  of 
of  the  church  of  England,  and  they  are  enforced  by  an  ob- 
servation so  justly  expressed,  and  so  well  adapted  to  my 
present  purpose,  that  I  must  take  the  liberty  of  presenting 
it  to  the  notice  of  those  for  whom  this  publication  is  more 
particularly  intended.  "  But,  as  there  is  nothing  to  en- 
lighten the  minds  of  men  in  the  doctrines  of  salvation,  but 
the  word  of  God ;  so  there  is  nothing  that  can  unite  their 
hearts  and  affections,  but  the  church  of  God,  Ye  are  one 
bread,  and  one  body,  saith  the  Aposde  ;  one  body  by  par- 
taking of  one  bread;  and  that  can  only  be  in  the  sajne  com- 
mumoiiy'^  Impressed  therefore  with  the  truth  and  import- 
ance of  what  is  here  so  justly  asserted,  and  eamestly  de- 

*  See  the  preface  to  an  Essay  en.  ibe  C^nrcb,  hj  the  late  Rijv  WillJam, 
Jonesj  of  Navl^^nd,  \xi  SuffolK- 


12  INTRODUCTION. 

sirous  of  its  producing  the  same  effect  in  the  minds  of 
those  for  whose  benefit  I  am  now  writing,  I  shall  beg  leave 
to  request  their  serious  and  impartial  consideration  of  the 
subject  before  us;  while,  taking  a  view  of  the  general  state 
of  religion  in  this  countr}',  and  the  danger  to  which  it  is 
exposed,  from  professed  infidels  on  the  one  hand,  and  from 
the  fanatical  abettors  of  enthusiasm  on  the  other,  we  look 
back  through  all  this  mist  of  modern  confusion,  to  the  pri- 
mitive order  and  uniformity  of  the  church,  and  see  what 
necessity  there  is  for  our  continuing  still  in  the  "  Apostles' 
doctrine  and  fellowship^''  as  the  only  source  of  order  and 
guard  of  uniformity. — We  shall  then  close  our  view  with 
such  a  brief,  but,  I  trust,  satisfactory  account  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical orders  and  administrations  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
in  Scotland,  as,  notwidistanding  the  violent  attack  which 
was  lately  made  upon  it  by  a  learned  Professor  of  the 
establishment,  may  tend,  by  the  blessing  of  God,  to  con- 
firm the  regard  and  attachment  of  its  present  members;  to 
promote  a  becoming  union  among  all  those  who  profess 
to  be  of  the  Episcopal  persuasion  in  this  part  of  the  king- 
dom ;  and  to  fumish  them  with  proper  arguments  for  the 
vindication  of  those  sound  and  salutary  principles,  by 
which  they  have  the  happiness  to  be  distinguished. 

It  is  an  observation  of  undeniable  certaint}^,  that  the 
same  Divine  Being,  the  Almighty  Lord  of  heaven  and 
earth,  who  has  given  to  man  the  good  things  of  creation 
for  the  use  and  benefit  of  his  body,  and  the  precious  truths 
of  revelation  for  the  instruction  and  comfort  of  his  soul, 
has  in  both  instances  met  with  the  most  ungrateful  and 
unworthy  returns.  The  good  things  of  creation  have  been 
abused  to  the  basest  purposes  of  riot  and  intemperance, 
consumed  in  sin  and  sensuality,  and  often  made  a  pretence 
for  indulging  covetousness  and  ambition,  a  sordid  parsi- 
mony and  griping  avarice;  while  the  precious  truths  of 
revelation  have  been  treated  with  the  most  insolent  scorn 
and  contempt,  exposed  to  all  the  wantonnoes  of  raillery  and 


INTRODUCTION.  IS 

ridicule,  and  often  so  strangely  perverted,  as  to  produce  no- 
thing but  blind  superstition  and  enthusiastic  presumption. 

It  is  not  enough,  however,  that  we  acknowledge  in  ge- 
neral the  truth  of  this  melancholy  observation :  let  us  ex- 
amine whether  such  a  charge  be  strictly  just,  when  applied 
to  the  inhabitants  of  this  land,  the  country  with  which  we 
are  most  immediately  connected.  Perhaps,  when  compar- 
ing our  moral  character  with  that  of  other  states  and  king- 
doms, we  may  feel  an  inclination  at  once  to  resist  the 
charge,  because  our  country  cannot  in  justice  be  accused  of 
such  flagrant  abuses  of  the  divine  goodness  as  are  too  often 
exhibited  in  other  parts  of  the  world.  But  before  we  allow 
ourselves  to  be  carried  away  by  any  such  superficial  and 
flattering  comparison,  we  shall  do  well  to  consider,  whether 
this  moral  superiority,  which  at  present  we  undoubtedly 
possess,  may  not  be  more  justly  ascribed  to  a  want  o£ 
means  and  opportunity  of  carrying  the  pursuit  of  sensual 
and  worldly  pleasure  to  the  same  height  with  our  richer 
neighbours,  than  to  any  want  of  inclination,  from  principle, 
to  the  abuses  which  I  have  been  mentioning.  It  seems 
therefore  a  doubtful  point,  whether  our  virtue  in  this  re- 
spect is  to  be  traced  to  the  proper  source  and  principle  of 
all  that  deser\'es  to  be  called  virtue,  or  whether  our  being 
"  delivered  from  much  of  the  evil"  that  prevails  in  other 
places,  may  not  be  ascribed  to  the  favourable  circumstance 
of  our  not  being  so  much  "  led  into  t  mptation."  But 
whatever  may  be  said,  either  for  or  against  our  national 
character,  on  this  score,  it  can  only  be  applied  to  the  first 
branch  of  the  charge  to  which  I  have  alluded,  as  pointing 
to  that  presumptuous  abuse  of  the  good  things  of  creation, 
the  criminality  of  which  will  no  doubt  be  in  proportion  to 
the  share  that  is  enjoyed  of  these  temporal  blessings  ;  and 
those,  to  whom  little  is  given,  will  surely  have  the  less  to 
account  for.  But  as  to  the  other  part  of  the  charge,  in 
which  our  country  is  implicated,  as  professing  to  be  Chris- 
tian, and  enjoying  the  full  benefit  of  divine  revelation,  I  ant 


14  INTRODUCTION. 

afraid,  that  in  the  contempt,  or  abuse  of  Its  precious  truths, 
as  much  guilt  and  depravity  will  be  found  here,  in  propor- 
tion to  our  numbers,  as  in  the  other  parts  of  the  united 
kingdom. 

From  the  advantages  which  Scotland  has  long  enjoyed 
in  the  way  of  literature,  and  the  easy  access  thus  afforded 
to  the  general  acquisition  of  knowledge,  has  arisen  the 
powerful  temptation,  which  many  have  been  unable  to 
withstand,  of  carrying  their  speculations  beyond  the  proper 
limits,  and  affecting  to  be  wise  even  in  matters  of  religion, 
above  what  God  has  caused  to  be  written  for  man's  instruc- 
tion. While  such  speculations,  however,  were  confined  to 
the  student  in  his  closet,  their  influence  was  narrow  and 
circumscribed;  and  the  general  state  of  society  was  but  lit- 
tle affected  by  the  writings  of  such  infidels  as  David  Hume^ 
till  they  were  better  suited  to  vulgar  capacity,  and  their 
deadly  venom  more  widely  circulated,  by  the  poisonousf 
arts  of  Thomas  Pame^  and  his  numerous  disciples.  These- 
could  not  fail  at  last  to  attract  the  notice  of  government ; 
and  by  its  firm  and  steady  exertions,  a  stop  has  been  put  to 
the  open  and  avowed  propagation  of  principles  so  hostile  to 
the  morals,  the  peace,  and  good  order  of  society.  Yet  it  is 
much  to  be  feared,  that  in  many  parts  of  the  kingdom,  the 
seeds  of  irreligion  and  licentiousness  have  been  so  plenti- 
fully disseminated,  that  unless  their  growth  be  checked  by 
a  returning  sense  of  duty,  or  some  powerful  interposition 
of  Providence,  before  they  come  to  full  maturity,  inevita- 
ble  ruin  must  be  the  consequence.  Already  do  the  presa- 
ges of  such  a  fatal  issue  begin  to  exhibit  themselves.  In 
some  of  the  most  populous  districts  of  Scotland,  where  the 
middling  and  lower  ranks  of  the  people  were,  some  years 
ago,  exemplary  in  the  discharge  of  their  religious  duties, 
not  occasional  neglect  only,  but  a  constant  derision,  and  an 
avowed  contempt  of  these  duties,  have  now  taken  place. 
The  rites  and  ordinances  of  the  gospel  are  exposed  to 
every  species  of  scorn  and  ridicule.    Children  are  wilfullr 


INTRODUCTION.  t5 

withlield  from  the  "  laver  of  regeneration ;"  and  men  and 
women  "  count  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherewith  they 
are  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  in  pure  despite  of  the  spirit 
of  gi'ace." 

The  attainment  of  superior  wisdom  has  been  the  boast  of 
the  free-thinking  tribe  in  every  age,  and  in  every  nation  i 
and  much  mischief  has  been  done  to  the  cause  of  Chris- 
tianity by  the  sophisms  of  schoolmen,  and  the  introduction 
of  that  false  philosophy  and  vain  deceit,  the  offspring  of 
metaphysical  subtilty,  through  v/hich  so  many  in  the  higher 
ranks  of  life  have  been  completely  "  spoiled  and  led 
away  after  the  rudiments  of  the  world,  and  not  after 
Christ."  Yet  comparatively  small  was  the  injury,  so  long 
as  the  poor  had  the  gospel  preached  unto  them  ;  so  long  as 
the  mass  of  society  was  uncontaminated,  and  the  great 
body  of  the  people  esteemed  themselves  happy  in  enjoying 
the  comforts  of  religion,  and  "  counted  all  things  but  loss, 
for  the  excellency  of  the  knowledge  of  Christ  Jesus  their 
Lord."  The  partition- wall,  however,  between  learned  and 
unlearned,  is  now  in  this  respect  broken  down.  The  adepts 
of  the  new  philosophy  have  availed  themselves  of  the  faci- 
lity, with  which  the  lower  classes  of  the  people  may  be 
tempted  to  get  rid  of  this  distinction ;  and,  if  we  may  bor- 
row the  figurative  language  of  the  Psalmist,  "  the  boar  out 
of  the  wood  doth  now  waste  it,  and  the  wild  beast  of  the 
field  doth  devour"  and  tear  in  pieces,  the  gospel  of  that 
•'  God  of  hosts,"  who  proclaimed  himself  "  the  true  vine ;" 
even  the  "  Shepherd  of  Israel,"  of  whom  the  same  Psalm- 
ist declares,  that  "  he  is  our  God,  and  we  are  the  people  of 
his  pasture,  and  the  sheep  of  his  hand." — What  a  pity  it  is 
that  the  grievous  wolves  of  atheism  and  apostacy  should  be 
allowed  to  enter  in  among  us,  clothed  as  they  are  in  the 
lambskin  dress  of  fraternal  benevolence,  and  universal  phi- 
lanthropy ;  under  which  guise,  "  speaking  perverse  things 
to  draw  away  disciples  after  them,"  they  spare  not  the 
flock  of  Christ,  but  are  daily  carrying  off  unstable  souls  to 


16  INTRODUCTION. 

the  destruction  that  awaits  them!  To  whom,  but  to  thait 
same  mighty  Shepherd  of  Israel,  who  neither  slumbereth 
nor  sleepeth,  can  we  look  for  such  aid  and  protection  as  are 
necessary  to  defend  us  from  these  enemies  of  our  peace  ? 

But,  while  we  fly  to  him  for  shelter,  earnestly  praying 
that  he  would  take  us  under  "  the  shadow  of  his  wings, 
until  these  calamities  be  overpast,"  we  must  be  equally 
careful  to  beware  of  the  modern  "  false  prophets,"  and  not 
listen  to  the  pretensions  of  such  as  are  ever  seeking  to 
exalt  themselves,  by  going  about  and  saying,  "  Lo,  here  is 
Christ,  or  lo  there  ;"  for  Christ  himself  hath  left  this  warn- 
ing with  us — "  Not  every  one  that  saith  unto  ine,  Lord, 
Lord,  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  but  he  that 
doth  the  will  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven."-^'  Now 
this  heavenly  Father  being  the  God  of  order,  not  of  confu- 
sion, his  will  must  in  every  thing  accord  with  his  work ; 
and  we  are  to  discover  what  his  Vv'ill  is,  from  v/hat  he  has 
done  for  the  purpose  of  revealing  it  to  us.  His  doings^  no 
doubt,  mav  be  often  "  marvellous  in  our  eyes ;"  but  no 
man,  who  is  not  actuated  by  the  most  palpable  presumption 
and  self-confidence,  will  dare  to  infringe,  or  pretend  to 
alter,  the  order  of  God's  works,  whether  they  refer  to  his 
operations  in  the  economy  of  nature,  or  of  grace.  Bold 
and  assuming  as  the  naturalist  too  often  is,  he  never  has 
attempted  to  invert  the  seasons ;  to  make  the  sun  rule  by- 
night,  and  the  moon  by  day;  to  oppose  the  stars  in  their 
courses  ;  to  bring  the  winds  out  of  their  treasures,  or  to 
allay  the  fury  of  the  tempest  by  his  unavailing  "  peace,  be 
still."  How  then  should  any  one  pretend  to  alter  the 
system  of  things  spiritual ; — to  change  the  economy  of 
grace  ; — to  disjoint  the  whole  frame  of  religion,  by  oppos- 
ing the  revealed  will  of  God,  and  setting  aside  the  laws 
and  institutions  of  his  divine  appointment  ?  Yet  all  this 
may  be  justly  laid  to  the  charge  of  those  wild  entliusiasts^ 

*  St.  Manhevr  vli.  21 


INTRODUCTION.  t> 

who,  full  of  the  assurance  of  faith,  and  the  inward  expe* 
rience  of  a  self-confident  mind,  enroll  themselves  among 
the  elect  of  God ;  and,  certain,  as  they  suppose,  of  being 
saved  themselves,  look  down  with  contemptuous  disdain  on 
those  humble  Christians  who  are  yet  content  to  "■  work  out 
their  own  salvation,"  in  the  way  that  God  has  prescribed^ 
"  with  fear  and  trembling."— A  doctrine^  which  thus  tears 
away  from  the  human  heart  every  solid  motive  to  a  holy 
and  religious  life  j  which  tells  us^  in  language  as  plain  as 
these  people  can  possibly  make  use  of,  that  if  we  are  in  the 
number  of  the  elect,  there  is  no  fear,  and  if  we  are  not^ 
there  is  no  hope :  Such  a  doctrine,  the  abettors  of  it,  no 
doubt,  justly  suppose,  would  require  to  be  supported,  not 
by  human  authority,  but  by  an  immediate  testimony  from 
heaven;  and  therefore  the  modern  preachers  of  this  new- 
gospel,  despising  the  commission  which  our  Lord  gave  his 
Apostles,  to  be  handed  down  by  regular  succession,  have 
all  at  once  assumed  to  themselves  a  title,  by  which  they 
would  make  the  world  believe  that  they  have  now  the 
only  mission  from  heaven  that  exists  upon  this  earth,  th6 
peculiar  privilege  of  preaching  what  they  are  pleased  to  call 
the  Gospel^  in  opposition  to  all  that  the  church  of  God  has 
hitherto  received  under  that  venerable  name. 

How  long  this  delusion,  which  is  now  spreading  so  wide 
through  every  part  of  the  kingdom,  may  prevail,  it  is  not 
easy  to  say  ;  as  the  power  of  delusion  is  strong,  both  when 
it  would  appear  to  be  on  the  side  of  religion,  and  when  it 
operates  in  a  contrary  direction.  Attempts  have  been 
made,  by  something  like  ecclesiastical  authority,  to  stop  the 
progress  of  this  growing  evil,  and  to  administer  a  remedy 
to  those  who  are  infectecj  by  this  missionary  phrensy ;  a 
sort  of  possession  more  worthy  of  one  who  has  his  "  dwel- 
ling among  the  tombs,"  than  of  those  who  reside  in  the 
habitations  of  men !  But  they  who  prescribe  the  remedy, 
ought  to  understand  well  the  nature  of  the  disease,  and  be 
able  to  trace  the  malady  to  its  proper  source.     People  who 

3 


18  INTRODUCTION. 

admonish  others  to  beware  of  falling  into  any  dangerous 
error  in  matters  of  religion,  ought  themselves  to  be  exempt 
from  the  mischief,  against  v/hich  their  admonition  is  direct- 
ed. Such  warnings  come  with  an  ill  grace,  and  therefore 
with  no  great  probability  of  doing  much  good,  from  those, 
who,  perhaps  it  will  be  said,  derive  their  own  ministry 
from  the  same  contempt  of  a  regular  apostolic  mission,  of 
which  they  now  see  such  alarming  consequences,  as  have 
at  last  produced  a  wish  to  prevent  their  farther  increase. 

In  the  midst  of  all  this  confusion,  this  melancholy  depar- 
ture from  PRIMITIVE  TRUTH  AND  ORDER,  wc  of  the  Epis- 
copal Communion  have  the  credit  and  comfort  of  reflecting, 
that  nothing  has  been  said  or  done  on  our  part  to  promote 
or  encourage  such  wild  deviation  from  the  paths  of  true  re- 
ligion, the  ways  of  unity,  peace  and  love,  which  our  blessed 
Redeemer  marked  out  for  all  his  faithful  followers. — It  ig 
true,  we  are  separated,  and  must  continue  to  be  separate 
from  the  establishment  of  this  country;  not  as  influenced 
by  a  spirit  of  opposition  to  whatever  is  established  either  in 
church  or  state  (which  seems  to  be  a  prominent  feature  in 
the  doctrine  of  these  new  Apostles),  but  because  we  act  on 
principles  which  require  and  justify  such  separation ;  and 
which,  if  well  understood,  and  duly  adhered  to,  would  en- 
sure stability  to  every  sound  establishment,  and  prevent 
those  unhappy  divisions,  which  serve  only  to  multiply 
error,  and  drive  men  farther  and  farther  from  the  truth  as 
it  is  in  Christ. 

Such  as  I  have  now  described  it,  is  evidently  the  situa- 
tion of  the  land  in  which  we  live,  with  respect  to  the  reli- 
^ous  character  of  a  great  majority  of  its  inhabitants,  very 
much  resembling  the  state  of  things  in  the  Jewish  churchy 
at  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  first  coming  into  the  flesh, 
when  the  true  religion  was  either  totally  set  aside  by  the 
infidelity  of  the  Sadducees,  or  sadly  corrupted  by  the 
vile  hypocrisy  of  self-con'beited  Pharisees.  The  former, 
led  away,  like  our  modem  Illuminati^  with  a  vain  affecta- 


INTRODUCTION.  ig^ 

lion  of  superior  discernment,  could  not  bear  the  thoughts 
of  submitting  their  enlightened  understandings  to  the  fa- 
miliar tenets  of  a  vulgar  faith.  They  must  have  a  creed  of 
a  different  form,  perfectly  suited  to  what  tliey  are  pleased 
to  call  Reason^  and  the  Fitness  of  things.  This  has  been 
the  idol  of  the  unbelieving  race,  in  all  ages  and  places  of 
the  world.  And  though  the  vanity  of  their  scheme  has  been 
often  exposed  in  the  clearest  manner,  and  to  the  full  satis- 
faction of  ever>^  serious,  sober-thinking  person;  yet  it  would 
seem  to  require  the  same  divine  eloquence  now  as  it  did 
formerly,  to  "  put  the  Sadducees  to  silence." 

But  though  it  were  possible  (and  with  God  it  cannot  be 
impossible)  to  check  the  licentious  railings  of  these  "  bold 
disputers,  who  even  deny  the  Lord  that  bought  them  -, 
denying,  either  that  they  are  bought,  or  that  he  who  bought 
them  is  the  Lord — the  eternal.  Almighty  Jehovah;  the 
true  faith  has  yet  another  sort  of  enemies  to  combat  with, 
in  the  imitators  of  those  pharisaical  pretenders  to  religion, 
of  whom  St.  Paul  gives  a  most  just  and  striking  descrip- 
tion in  these  words — "  For  I  bear  them  record,  that  they 
have  a  zeal  of  God,  but  not  according  to  knowledge.  For 
they,  being  ignorant  of  God's  righteousness,  and  going 
about,  to  establish  their  own  righteousness,  have  not  sub- 
mitted themselves  unto  the  righteousness  of  God."^ — Sub- 
mission to  the  righteous  will  and  appointment  of  God  was 
no  part  of  the  religion  adopted  by  that  zealous  ignorance^ 
the  effects  of  which  are  here  so  minutely  described ;  and 
similar  effects  are  still  flowing  from  the  same  unhappy 
cause.  The  pride  of  infidelity,  we  may  well  suppose,  is 
not  a  litde  cherished  and  supported  by  the  gross  absurdi- 
ties which  prevail  among  many  of  those  who  profess  to 
believe  the  great  truths  of  the  gospel ;  and  who,  in  flying 
from  the  ruinous  paths  of  the  impious  sceptic,  are  often 
sadly  bewildered  in  ways  of  their  own  devising,  and  plunge 

*  Rom.  X.  2,  3. 


eo  INTRODUCTION*. 

themselves  into  all  the  follies  of  the  wild  enthusiast.  There 
seems  to  be  a  strange  propensity  in  many  of  our  country- 
men to  be  misguided  by  such  as  thus  go  about  to  deceive  ; 
and  who,  to  carry  on  their  d^^ceit  the  more  effectually,  lay 
it  down  as  an  undoubted  maxim,  very  flattering  to  the  va- 
nity of  the  human  heart,  that  any  man  who  can  read,  may, 
with  the  scriptures  in  his  hands,  be  able  to  know  and  do 
every  thing  necessaiT  to  salvation.  But  this,  though  partly 
true,  is  not  the  whole  truth  ;  and  well-meaning  people 
ought  to  be  put  on  their  guard  against  such  an  artful  mis- 
representation. Had  the  scriptures  contained  only  a  few 
moral  precepts,  tending  to  presence  the  peace  of  society, 
and  to  regulate  man's  conduct  towards  his  neighbour,  with- 
out prescribing  any  sacred  rites  and  institutions,  as  a  testi- 
mony of  his  submission  to  the  will  of  his  God,  the  maxim 
I  have  mentioned  might  have  been  assumed  with  more 
propriet}^  But  is  this  really  the  case  ?  Has  a  man,  in 
order  to  be  made  a  Christian,  nothing  more  to  do  than  to 
go  to  a  bookseller's  shop  and  purchase  a  bible,  that  he  may 
peruse  it  at  his  leisure  an  A  interpret  it  as  he  thinks  fit? 
With  all  the  liberality  which  this  age  possesses,  no  one  has 
yet  ventured  to  assert  so  much  in  plain  terms,  although  the 
loose  opinions,  which  so  generally  prevail,  clearly  show, 
that  too  many  are  guided  by  no  other  principle. 

In  tracing  these  and  many  other  growing  evils  to  their 
proper  source,  we  may  easily  find  their  original  in  that 
lamentable  ignorance  of  the  true  nature  and  constitution  of 
the  Christian  Church  ;  and  of  consequence,  that  total  want 
of  regird  for  the  order  and  succession  of  its  ministers 
which  have,  of  late  years,  so  wofuUy  prevailed  among  us  -j 
encouraged  and  countenanced  by  a  numerous  set  both  of 
preachers  and  authors,  whose  interest  it  is  to  flatter  men 
in  this  fashionable  error,  and  take  advantage  of  it.  Hence 
it  is,  that  the  Christian  world  has  been  bewildered  and  led 
astray  by  so  many  unfaithful  histories  of  the  church,  and 
such  ill-digested  lectures  on  that  subject,  as  could  onlv 


INTRODUCTION.  21 

come  from  persons  who  found  it  necessary  to  touch  these 
things  ver*/  tenderly,  because  the  ground  on  which  they 
stood  in  their  official  character,  was  not  so  firm  as  to  bear 
them  up  in  any  other  language  than  that  of  the  false  pro- 
phets of  old,  "  who  spoke  smooth  things,  and  prophesied 
deceits,  because  the  people  loved  to  have  it  so."  A  writer 
of  another  stamp,  the  late  pious  and  learned  Bishop  of 
Norwich,  in  laving  before  his  clergy  a  brief  account  of  the 
great  fundamental  doctrines  which  they  were  to  inculcate, 
as  essential  to  Christianity,  and  without  which,  it  cannot 
be  considered  as  a  religion  true  in  itself  or  beneficial  to  us, 
takes  care  to  include  in  the  number  of  these  important  doc- 
trines, the  Constitution  and  Use  of  the  Church ;  "  a  subject 
on  which,"  he  says,  men's  principles  for  some  years  past 
"  have  been  very  unsettled,  and  their  knowledge  preca- 
rious and  superficial."* — We  need  not  wonder  that  this 
should  be  the  case,  when  men  are  at  so  little  pains  to  ac- 
quire that  sound  substantial  knowledge,  which  is  absolutely 
necessar)^  to  settle  their  principles,  and  give  them  just  and 
suitable  ideas  on  a  subject  of  such  serious  and  striking  im- 
portance, as  was  ascribed  by  the  blessed  Author  of  our 
religion,  to  the  way  and  manner,  the  purpose  and  design  of 
his  building  or  raising  that  society,  which  he  was  pleased 
to  call  his  church,  and  which  he  no  sooner  entered  on  his 
public  ministr\^,  than  he  began  to  establish.')* 

Now  that  this  church  of  Christ,  thus  established  by 
himself  in  person,  and  afterwards  enlarged  b}^  his  Apostles, 
on  the  plan  which  he  had  laid  down  for  their  direction, 
ought  to  be  considered  as  a  regular,  well  formed  society, 
is  evident  from  the  names  and  allusions  by  which  it  is 
described  in  the  sacred  writings.  It  is  there  represented 
as  a  bodi/^  a  household  or  family,  a  city,  a  kingdom;  and 
must  certainly  bear  some  kind  of  relation  to  what  these 
terms  are  generally  knoA^m  to  imply.     Indeed,  no  one  who 

*  See  Bishop  Home's  Charge,  p.  21.        f  See  St.  Matthew  xvi.  18,  19. 


22  INTRODUCTION. 

reflects  ibr  a  moment  on  the  nature  of  these  figurative 
expressions,  can  be  ignorant  wherein  it  is  that  this  relation 
or  connection  takes  place.  The  church  is  a  body  having 
many  members,  of  which  Christ  is  the  head.  The  church 
is  a  '^  household''''  ox  family^  of  which  Christ  is  the  master,— 
"  of  whom  the  whole  family  is  named;"  and  into  which 
being  admitted  by  baptism,  we  receive  the  spirit  of  adop- 
tion, whereby  we  are  allowed  and  enabled  to  call  the  great 
Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  our  Father.  The  church  is  also 
called  the  "  city  of  the  living  God ;"  and  Christians  are 
said  to  be  "  fellow-citizens  w^ith  the  saints :"  and  it  is  of- 
ten mentioned  as  a  kingdom^  of  which  Christ — ^the  King  of 
saints — is  the  Almighty  Sovereign,  "  to  whom  all  power 
is  given,  in  heaven  and  in  earth."  In  all  these  respects, 
the  church  must  be  considered  as  an  outward  and  visible 
society,  possessing  all  the  powers  and  privileges,  and  im- 
posing on  its  members  all  the  relative  duties  implied  in 
the  allusions  which  I  have  now  quoted.  As  a  body^  all 
the  members  must  be  joined  to  the  head,  and  to  one  an- 
other, that  they  may  receive  life  and  motion  for  the  dis- 
charge of  their  several  functions.  As  a  family^  its  Al- 
mighty Father  must  in  every  thing  be  the  guide  and  di- 
rector of  his  children,  appointing  for  them  the  proper  teach- 
ers and  masters,  and  training  them  up  in  the  way  of  life, 
from  which  they  must  never  depart.  As  a  household^  the 
church  must  not  be  divided  against  itself:  that  it  may 
stand,  it  must  be  upheld  in  unity  and  order,  and  by  sub- 
mission to  such  wholesome  discipline,  as  in  the  charitable 
institutions  of  this  world  is  found  necessary  to  be  imposed 
on  all  who  are  admitted  to  share  in  the  liberality  of  the 
founders.  As  a  city  and  kingdom^  the  church  must  be 
watched  over,  and  governed  by  its  proper  officers,  deriv- 
ing their  spiritual  power  and  authority  from  that  heavenly- 
Sovereign,  who  is  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords. 

Such  then  being  the  light  in  which  we  are  taught  to  view 
the  nature  and  design  of  that  holy  and  heavenly  society^ 


INTRODUCTION.  SS- 

which  in  scripture  is  called  the  church;  let  us  now  cast  a 
veil  over  the  confusions  of  these  latter  days,  and  set  our- 
selves to  inquire  after  the  order  and  uniformity  of  the 
primitive  ages  of  Christianity;  when  the  doctrine  and 
fellowship  of  the  Apostles  were  strictly  and  steadfastly 
adhered  to,  and  Christians  continued  most  faitiifuUy  and 
conscientiously  "  in  the  things  which  they  had  learned, 
and  been  assured  of,  knowing  of  whom  they  had  learned 
them."  And  as  in  the  course  of  this  inquiry,  it  may  be 
necessary,  for  the  truth's  sake,  to  speak  of  things  as  they 
really  are,  and  not  "  call  evil  good,  and  good  evil,  or  put 
darkness  for  light,  and  light  for  darkness ;"  it  is  hoped 
that  such  candid  and  honest  dealing  will  not  be  misinter- 
preted as  the  indication  of  an  uncharitable,  or  illiberal 
mind;  but  justly  considered  as  proceeding  from  an  earnest 
desire  to  promote  the  salvation  of  men,  and  to  join  fer- 
vently in  the  pious  wish  and  petition  of  the  church,  as  ex- 
pressed in  one  of  her  daily  prayers,  "  that  all  who  profess 
and  call  themselves  Christians  may  be  led  into  the  way  of 
truth,  and  hold  the  faith  in  unity  of  spirit,  in  the  bond  of 
peace,  and  in  righteousness  of  life." 

How  then  can  any  want  of  true  charity,  or  what  de- 
serves to  be  called  liberality,  be  with  justice  imputed  to 
him,  who,  in  his  professional  character,  is  doing  all  he  can 
for  the  benefit  of  his  fellow  Christians,  and  is  not  willing 
that  any  of  them  should  be  lost,  if  he  can  help  it  ?  Will 
nothing  serve  to  constitute  a  liberal-minded  Christian,  but 
that  lukewarm  indifference,  which  is  totally  unconcerned 
about  every  thing  connected  with  religion ;  which  looks 
on  all  professions  as  alike  safe,  provided  men  be  sincere, 
and  sees  no  reason  why  every  one  may  not  hope  to  "  get 
to  heaven"  in  his  own  way  I  Do  we  judge  thus  in  matters 
of  less  consequence,  and  where  the  interests  of  die  present 
life  only  are  concerned?  Is  he  applauded  as  a  liberal- 
minded  physician,  who,  seeing  his  patient  indulge  himself 
in  every  thing  that  tends  to  nourish  disease  and  impair  the 


5J4  INTRODUCTION. 

constitution,  flatters  him  that  all  shall  yet  be  well;  and  that 
he  does  right  to  go  on  in  his  own  way  ?  Is  he  applauded 
as  a  liberal-minded  lawyer,  who  tells  his  client^  that  he 
need  give  himself  no  trouble  about  the  laws  and  govern- 
ment of  this  country  ;  since,  in  order  to  preserve  the  rights 
and  liberties  of  a  British  subject,  he  may  be  as  well  di- 
rected in  every  thing  by  the  municipal  code  of  France,  or 
Russia,  or  any  other  country  ?  Is  the  commander  of  ar- 
mies applauded  as  a  liberal-minded  soldier,  who,  in  the 
day  of  battle,  leaves  his  troops  without  orders  or  instruc- 
tions of  any  kind,  and  lets  them  fight  the  enemy  in  the  way 
that  seems  best  to  their  own  judgment  ?  Why  then  should 
the  teacher  of  religion  be  applauded  as  a  liberal-minded 
divine,  whose  only  merit  lies  in  "  speaking  peace,  where 
there  is  no  peace,"  and  leaving  the  people  to  grope  for  the 
ivall  of  salvation,  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth  ;  when  by 
pointing  it  out,  through  the  mist  of  modern  error  and 
delusion,  as  "  a  city  set  on  a  hill,"  which  is  at  unity  in  itself, 
he  might  direct  their  eyes  to  that  which  is  the  only  sure 
refuge  from  sin  and  misery,  the  only  pjace  of  safety  to  a 
guilty  world,  and,  therefore,  ought  to  be  "  the  joy  of  the 
whole  earth."  Conscious,  therefore,  of  possessing  no  other 
spirit  than  the  spirit  of  Christian  charity,  and  actuated  by 
no  other  motive  than  the  desire  of  promoting  the  glory  of 
God,  and  the  good  of  my  Christian  brethren,  I  shall  pro- 
ceed to  establish  the  following  plain  and  important  facts, 
as  matters  of  undoubted  certainty,  and  woithy  of  the  most 
serious  consideration. 

I.  That  the  Christian  religion,  being,  like  its  divine 
Author,  "  the  same  yesterday,  to-day  and  for  ever,"  ought 
to  be  received  and  embraced,  just  as  it  is  represented  and 
held  out  in  the  scriptures  of  truth,  without  "  adding  there- 
to, or  diminishing  from  it." 

II.  That  the  church  of  Christ,  in  which  his  religion  is 
received  and  embraced,  is  that  spiritual  society  in  which 
the  ministration  of  holy  things  is  committed  to  the  three 


INTRODUCTION.  25 

distinct  orders  of  Bishops,  Priests  and  Deacons,  deriving 
their  authority  from  the  Apostles,  as  those  Apostles  re- 
ceived their  commission  from  Christ.     And, 

III.  That  a  part  of  this  holy,  catholic  and  apostolic 
church,  though  deprived  of  the  support  of  civil  establish- 
ment, does  still  exist  in  this  countiy,  under  the  name  of 
the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church;  whose  doctrine,  discipline 
and  worship,  as  happily  agreeing  with  that  of  the  first  and 
purest  ages  of  Christianity,  ought  to  be  steadily  adhered 
to,  by  all  who  profess  to  be  of  the  Episcopal  Communion, 
in  this  part  of  the  kingdom. 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  Christian  Religion^  beings  like  its  Divine  Author, "  the 
same  yesterday,  to-day  and  Jor  ever,''  ought  to  be  re^ 
ceivedand  embraced  just  as  it  is  represented  and  held  out 
in  the  Scriptures  of  Truth,  "  without  adding  thereto  or 
diminishing  from  it.'* 

JL  he  truth  of  this  proposition  is  so  evident,  as  to  admit 
of  no  sort  of  doubt  in  the  minds  of  those  who  are  rightly 
instructed  in  the  knowledge  of  divine  things:  and  there 
cannot  be  a  more  agreeable  subject  of  Christian  medita- 
tion, than  to  survey  the  various  means  and  instruments  by 
which  God  has  been  pleased  to  convey  this  comfortable  in- 
struction to  man.  For  this  purpose  we  are  assured,  that 
the  same  "  God,  who  at  sundry  times,  and  in  divers  man- 
ners, spake  in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets^ 
hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son."^  The 
only  difference,  which  is  here  pointed  out  to  our  notice, 
refers  to  the  ti?nes  and  to  the  maimers  in  which  God  hath 
spoken;  for  under  all  this  variety  with  respect  to  the  mode 
of  revelation,  the  subject  was  the  same,  and  the  speaker 
the  same,  the  voice  of  the  one  true  God  proclaiming  the 
"  one  Mediator  between  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ 
Jesus,  who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all."t  It  was  ia 
consequence  of  his  giving  this  all-sufficient  ransom,  that  he 
became  that  powerful  Mediator,  who  alone  could  make 
peace  between  heaven  and  earth;  and  who,  according  to 
the  terms  of  the  everlasting  covenant  of  grace  and  mercy, 
did  of  his  own  free  love,  and  unmerited  goodness  to  man, 
graciously  undertake  to  make  reconciliation  for  iniquity, 
and  to  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself;  which  sacri- 

»  Heb.  i.  1,  2.  t  1  Tim.  ii.  5,  6. 


2d  Pmiithe  Truth  and  Order  vindicated^ 

iice,  an  Apostle  tells  us,  "  was  verily  fore-ordained  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world."^  Hence  it  is  that  the  plan  of 
this  glorious  design  is  so  often  mentioned  in  scripture  as 
God's  purpose,  which  he  had  purposed  from  the  begin- 
ning—his "  etemal  purpose,  which  he  purposed  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord  j^t  his  "  pui-pose  and  grace,  which  was 
given  us  in  Christ  Jesus,  before  the  world  began  ;"."!:  which 
had  been  fore-ordained,  or  predestined  in  the  counsel  and 
decree  of  the  blessed  and  glorious  Trinity,  who  had  been 
pleased  to  bind  themselves  by  an  everlasting  covenant  to 
the  accomplishment  of  it.  This,  we  have  ground  to  be- 
lieve, is  the  true  scriptural  notion  of  predestination  ;  not 
any  absolute,  unconditional  decree  for  the  salvation  of 
particular  persons ;  but  only  God's  general  purpose  and 
resolution  of  sending  his  Son  into  the  world,  "  that  xvho- 
soever  believeth  in  him,  should  not  perish,  but  have  ever- 
lasting life."§  With  a  view  to  this  merciful  purpose,  tha 
scripture  describes,  in  terms  sufficiendy  adequate  to  the 
human  capacity,  the  several  parts,  which  the  three  per- 
sons in  the  Godhead,  and  man  too  by  their  appointment, 
have  to  act  in  this  blessed  scheme^  according  to  the  brief 
iiccount  given  of  it,  by  a  venerable  writer  of  the  primitive 
church,  in  these  words — "  the  Father  well  pleased,  the 
Son  administering  and  forming,  the  Spirit  nourishing  and 
increasing,  man  himself  gTadually  profiting  and  attaining 
towards  perfection."||  Such  ia  the  beautiful  representation, 
which  may  be  drawn  from  scripture,  of  the  mysterious 
scheme  of  salvation  provided  for  fallen  man  ;  and  of  the 
several  parts,  which  the  adorable  Three  in  Jehovah  have 
been  graciously  pleased  to  assign  to  themselves  in  carrying 
on  this  mighty  work  of  love  and  mercy  to  the  human  race. 
"  Known  unto  God  are  all  his  works  from  the  beginning 
of  the  world,"  particularly  that  which  is  the  crown  and 


*  1  Peter  i.  20.  f  Ephes.  iii.  11.  %  2  Tim.  i.  9. 

^  St.  John  iii.  16.  ||  Irenacus,  book  iv.  chap,  Ixxv. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicatedi  29 

glory  of  all  the  rest,  the  redemption  of  mankind  by  the 
sacrifice  and  death  of  his  beloved  Son.  But  had  not  this 
act  of  mercy  been  also  revealed  and  "  made  known"  to 
men,  as  soon  as  their  situation  required  such  a  comforta- 
ble discovery,  they  could  have  had  no  hope  of  being  re- 
conciled to  God ;  no  encouragement  to  serve  the  Lord 
with  gladness,  or  to  declare  with  grateful  joy,  "  that  his 
mercy  is  everlasting,  and  his  truth  endureth  to  all  genera- 
tions." It  was  justly  observed  by  a  writer  of  distinguished 
rank  in  this  country,  "  that  if  it  was  the  intention  of  God 
to  pardon  man ;  to  reclaim  him  from  his  sinful  state  j  to 
encourage  him  to  love,  fear,  and  serve  his  Creator,  and  to 
i"estore  him  to  a  capacity  of  performing  such  acceptable 
service,  it  was  absolutely  necessary,  for  promoting  that 
design,  to  acquaint  man  with  his  intentions  ;  to  give  such 
proof  of  those  intentions  as  should  convince  and  thoroughly 
persuade  those  to  whom  the  revelation  was  made,  and  to 
preserve  such  evidence  of  that  revelation  to  mankind,  as 
should  be  sufficient  to  support  their  faith  and  hope,  and  give 
them  ground  to  rejoice  in  the  God  of  their  salvation."^ 
Now  all  this  has  been  done  in  the  most  cortiplete  and  satis- 
factory manner,  by  that  same  wise  and  gracious  God,  ia 
the  unity  of  whose  essence  we  are  taught  to  believe,  that 
"  there  are  three  who  bear  record  in  heaven"  to  the  eternal 
purpose  of  man's  salvation;  and  who  have  not  left  them- 
selves without  witness  on  earth  to  that  covenanted  scheme 
of  grace,  mercy  and  peace,  which  was  in  much  compassion 
exhibited  to  fallen  man,  as  soon  as  his  deplorable  condition 
called  for  the  comfort  which  was  thence  to  be  derived* 
The  words,  in  which  the  inspired  historian  relates  the  pro- 
mise of  mercy,  are,  "  that  the  seed  of  the  woman  should 
bruise  the  head  of  the  serpent ;"  that  there  should,  in  the 
fulness  of  time,  be  born  of  the  posterity  of  Eve  a  Re- 


*  See  Svme  Thoughts  cmcerning  Religion,  ijfc.  by  the  late  Honourable 
Duncan  Forbes,  Lord  President  of  the  Court  cf  Sessions. 


30  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

deemer  or  Deliverer;  who,  by  making  satisfaction  for  the 
sins  of  men,  and  restoring  them  to  the  love  and  favour  of 
their  offended  Maker,  should  thereby  bruise  the  head, 
and  destroy  the  power  and  dominion  of  that  old  serpent 
the  devil,  who  had  beguiled  our  first  parents  into  sin,  and 
gained,  as  he  thought,  a  signal  triumph  over  them. 

Thus  early  was  the  gospel  preached,  and  the  glad 
tidings  of  salvation  published  to  the  human  race.— The  ac- 
count given  of  it  by  Moses  is  short  and  concise;  but  the 
revelation  itself,  as  coming  from  God,  was  no  doubt  full 
and  explicit.  One  thing  is  obvious,  that  the  change  which 
took  place  in  Adam's  condition,  as  the  consequence  of  his 
fall,  would  necessarily  lead  to  a  correspondent  change  in 
his  religious  service :  and  we  may  reasonably  conclude, 
that  such  a  form  of  worship  would  be  instituted,  as  might 
exhibit  his  dependence  on  the  covenant  of  grace  entered 
into  by  the  three  great  ones  in  deity,  one  of  whom  was 
to  unite  the  human  nature  with  his  own,  and  as  God  mani- 
fested in  the  flesh,  to  do  and  suffer  whatever  was  neces- 
sary for  man's  salvation.^  Accordingly  we  find,  that  when 
Adam's  transgression  required  his  expulsion  from  the 
earthly  paradise,  and  his  entrance  on  a  state  of  salutary 
discipline,  and  a  new  system  of  faith  and  trust  in  his  God, 
a  certain  emblematic  representation  was  placed  at  the  east 
of  the  garden  of  Eden,  exhibiting  the  ever-blessed  Trinity 
as  joined  in  covenant  to  redeem  man,  and  the  union  of  the 
divine  and  human  natures  in  the  person  of  the  Redeemer. 
The  Cherubim^  and  the  glory  around  them,  with  the  divine 
presence  in  them,  were  to  keep  or  preserve  the  way  of  the 
tree  of  life,  to  show  man  the  way  to  life  eternal,  and  keep 
him  from  losing,  or  departing  from  it.^    Before  this  emble- 

*  See  some  very  pertinent  remarks  on  this  subject,  in  a  volume  of  ex- 
cellent discourses  oh  the  great  doctrine  of  atoiie7nent,  lately  published — by 
the  Rev.  Charles  Daubeny,  LL.  B.  author  of  a  Guide  to  the  Church. 

t  I  know  it  has  been  thought,  that  this  venerable  figuie  called  the 
Cherubim  \\:\z  set  up  to  the  eastward  of  Eden;  merely  sis  ^  guard  to  keep 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  Si 

made  representation,  which  was  afterwards,  by  divine 
command,  set  up  in  the  tabernacle  of  Moses,  and  temple  ol" 
Solomon,  the  church  or  people  of  God  were  taught  to  per- 
form that  typical  serv^ice,  which  pointed  to  Christ,  as  the 
wai/y  the  truths  and  the  life^  and  kept  up  among  them  a 
constant  remembrance,  that  "  without  shedding  of  blood, 
there  was  no  remission  of  sin." 

It  was  to  preserve  a  due  regard  to  this  fundamental  arti- 
cle of  religion,  that  God  was  pleased  to  appoint  sacrifices 
of  expiation  and  atonement  for  sin,  and  required  such  ser- 
vices to  be  observed  through  all  succeeding  generations,  till 
the  Redeemer  himself  should  come,  who  was  to  do  away 
all  these  shadows  and  emblems,  and  to  make  the  true  satis- 
faction, the  only  proper  atonement.  In  proof  of  the  earli- 
ness  of  this  institution,  it  has  been  very  justly  remarked, 


unhappy  Adam  from  coming  at  the  tree  of  life,  and  so  the  mysterious 
account  here  given  of  it  has  been  much  exposed  to  the  scoffs  and  ridi- 
cule of  unbelievers.     On  this  subject  we  find  the  learned  Lord  President 
Forbes,  in  his  Thoughts  concerning  Religion,  thus  delivering  his  sentiments 
with  great  plainness. — "  The  Jews,  who  have  misconstrued  the  angel 
Jehovah  into  a  created  angel,  have  thought  fit  here  to  understand  by  the 
Cherubim  two  of  the  same  sort  of  angels,  v/ho  had  got  a  flaming  sword, 
to  frighten  Adam  from  re-entering  Eden,  and  meddling  with  the  fruit 
of  the  tree  of  life :  and  this  monstrous  story  they  have  made  out  of  a 
text,  that  necessarily  means  no  such  thing,  and  may  fairly  be  construed  to 
a  sense  big  with  the  most  important  information  to  mankind.     What  is 
translated,  to  keep  the  laay  ef  the  tree  of  life,  with  intent  to  prevent  the 
coming  at  it,  may  as  properly  be  rendered,  to  observe,  or  for  observing, 
and  so  discovering  and  finding  out,  the  ivay  to  the  tree  of  life.     And  the 
word  we  translate  placed,  is  almost  always  in  every  text  translated  inha- 
iited"  (as  in  a  tent  or  tabernacle)  ;  "  and  whether  you  translate  n placed 
or  inhabited,  the  next  word  ought  to  be  translated  the  Cherubim,  as  things, 
or  emblems,  well  known  to  those  for  whom  Moses  wrote.    So  that  Jeho- 
vah's placing  or  inhabiting  these    Cherubim,  was  the  method  chosen  by 
him,  to  make  the  "way  to  the  tree  of  life  kept  or  observed.'^     See  more  to 
the  same  purpose,  tending  to  show  that  the  Cherubim  of  the  scriptures 
were  mystical  figures  of  high  antiquity  and  great  signification,  being,  as 
Irenatus  calls  them,  "  Resemblances  of  tke  dispensation  of  the  Son  of 
God/'  that  is,  the  Christian  economy. 


32  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

that  the  skins,  with  which  God  is  said  to  have  clothed  the 
nakedness  of  our  first  parents,  must  have  been  the  skins  of 
beasts,  that  had  been  offered  by  them  in  sacrifice,  since  at 
that  time  they  were  not  allowed  to  kill  them  for  any  other 
purpose :  And  this  typical  clothing  was  a  most  comfort- 
able emblem  of  that  covering  and  protection  from  divine 
wrath,  that  garment  of  salvation  provided  for  man,  by  the 
sacrifice  of  the  Lamb  of  God,  who  was  to  take  away  the 
sin  of  the  world. 

The  rite  of  sacrifice  being  thus  established  by  divine 
authority,  as  the  instituted  emblem  of  redeeming  love,  it 
may  well  be  supposed,  that  Adam  and  his  family  would  be 
ready  to  testify  their  grateful  acceptance  of  that  love,  and 
dependence  on  it,  by  a  regular  application  to  die  means  ap- 
pointed for  directing  the  eye  of  the  faithful  offerer  to  that 
great  atonement,  which  the  blood  of  the  slain  animal  was 
designed  to  shadow  forth.  Indeed,  we  are  expressly  in- 
formed, that  the  two  sons  of  Adam,  Cain  and  Abel, 
brought  each  of  them  an  offering  unto  the  Lord,*  but  with 
this  remarkable  difference,  that  God  is  said  to  have  ''  had 
respect  unto  Abel,  and  to  his  offering,  while  unto  Cain,  and 
•to  his  offering,  he  had  not  respect :"  The  reason  of  which 
IS  given  in  these  words  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  "  By 
faith,  Abel  offered  unto  God  a  more  excellent  sacrifice  than 
Cain,  by  which  he  obtained  witness  that  he  was  righteous, 
God  testifying  of  his  gifts."f  This  it  was  that  made  the 
difference  between  his  sacrifice  and  Cain's,  that  the  one 
offered  by  faith,  the  other  did  not ;  by  faith  in  the  promised 
Redeemer,  and  from  a  humble  hope  of  being  accepted 
through  his  merits.    And  indeed  this  difference  appeal's  in 

*  Gen.  iv.  3,  4.  Where  this  ofTering  is  said  to  have  been  brought  to  the 
Lord  "  in  process  of  tivic,^*  or,  as  it  is  translated  on  the  margin  of  our 
Bible,  at  '•  t/je  end  of  days"  or  on  the  periodical  return  of  that  day,  whidv 
had  been  sanctified  from  the  beginning,  and  thereby  ijiore  iJl■»^^,ediate^^ 
set  apart  for  the  celebration  of  religious  worship- 
t  Hcb.  xi.  4 


Primitive  Tnith  and  Order  vindicated,  SS 

the  very  nature  of  their  gifts  or  offerings.  For  Cain 
brought  only  of  the  fruit  of  the  ground,  as  an  acknowiedge- 
ment  of  the  divine  bounty,  in  providing  for  his  temporal 
support,  and  giving  him  a  right  to  what  the  ground  pro- 
duced. But  he  showed  no  desire  to  act  in  conformity  ^^ith 
that  divine  plan  of  salvation  which  the  fall  had  rendered 
necessary  for  his  spiritual  comfort.  He  offered  no  living 
creature  as  an  atonement  for  sin,  and  whose  blood  was  to  be 
*hed  as  an  acknowledgement  of  the  forfeiture  of  life,  and 
as  a  type  or  emblem  of  the  all-atoning  sacrifice  of  the  great 
Redeemer.  In  short,  he  conducted  himself  as  if  he  had 
"wished  to  make  it  appear,  that  he  had  no  sin  to  be  atoned 
for,  no  belief  in  the  one  Mediator,  and  no  thought  of  ap- 
plying to  God,  through  faith  in  his  meritorious  ransom. 
Whereas  Abel,  conscious  of  his  fallen  state,  and  the  now 
sinful  condition  of  man,  offered  a  living  creature  to  God, 
''  the  Jirstlings  of  his  flock,  and  of  the  fiU  thereof,"  as  the 
instituted  type  or  memorial  of  the  great  Firat-horn^  through 
whose  sacred  blood  the  life  that  had  been  forfeited  was  to 
be  restored.  For  which  reason  Abel  is  said  to  have  offered 
hy  fa'ith^  and  the  Lord  had  respect  to  his  offering,  on  ac- 
count of  the  excellence  which  was  thereby  stamped  upon  it, 
and  the  topical  relation  which  it  bore  to  the  sacrifice  of  that 
beloved  Son,  in  whom  God  has  been  ever  well-pleased. 
But  the  offering  brought  by  Cain  had  no  such  qualities  :  It 
meant  no  expiation  for  sin,  nor  any  acknowledgement  of  it : 
It  was  not  made  in  faith  ;  nay,  it  was  so  far  from  having 
respect  to  the  Divine  Intercessor,  that  it  might  rather  be 
considered  as  a  formal  rejection  of  his  intercession;  and 
therefore  it  was  rejected,  and  God  had  no  respect  to  it,  or 
to  the  offerer.  In  this  early  and  remarkable  instance  we 
may  see  a  lively  representation,  on  the  one  hand,  of  the 
humble  and  devout  Christian,  who,  after  all  his  most  sincere 
and  diligent  endeavours  in  the  way  of  his  duty,  yet,  con- 
scious of  his  own  infirmities,  relies  upon  the  merits  of  his 
Saviour  j  and  on  the  other  hand,  a  representation  of  those. 


M  Frhnitwe  Truth  and  Order  vindicated* 

who  either  ascribe  too  much  to  their  own  merits,  or,  by  a> 
fatal  misapprehension,  neglect  and  undervalue  that  only- 
method  of  atonement  and  acceptance,  through  which  God 
hath  declared,  he  will  be  reconciled  to  sinners. 

We  have  no  reason  to  think  that  God  was  any  "  respecter 
of  persons,"  in  the  case  of  Cain  and  Abel,  as  recorded  in 
the  sacred  history  ;  for  it  was  the  different  quality  of  their 
offerings,  and  the  different  dispositions  with  which  they 
were  offered,  that  occasioned  the  difference  of  respect 
which  was  shown  to  them :  and  I  have  insisted  the  longer 
on  this  instance,  because  it  gives  us  so  plain,  and  so  early 
an  account  of  the  origin  of  sacrifices,  and  the  true  meaning 
and  design  of  them.  It  shows  us  that  sacrifice  had  an  evi-» 
dent  reference  to  the  promised  Redeemer,  and  being  insti- 
tuted on  the  first  declaration  of  mercy  through  him,  and 
carefully  observed  by  the  first  family  of  the  human  race, 
tvas  by  them  transmitted  to  all  mankind.  Hence  we  may 
easily  perceive,  how  the  notion  of  expiating  sin,  and  ap* 
peasing  the  offended  Deity  by  sacrifices,  became  so  univer- 
sal, and  spread  itself  into  the  most  distant  ages  and  coun- 
tries. When  the  sons  of  men  began  to  multiply,  and  to 
disperse  themselves  in  colonies  upon  the  face  of  the  whole 
earth,  they  never  failed  to  carry  these  sacred  rites  along 
with  them,  as  well  knowing  how  precious  a  treasure  they 
contained ;  and  that  in  the  religious  and  due  use  of  them, 
they  might  humbly  expect  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins,  and 
the  favour  of  God,  through  the  efficacy  of  that  all-sufficient 
sacrifice,  which  they  typically  represented,  and  which  was 
in  the  fulness  of  time  to  be  offered  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world.  We  need  not  wonder  then,  that  in  these  primitive 
ages,  men  were  so  tenacious  of  such  important  rites,  and 
took  all  due  care  to  evince  the  high  opinion  they  entertained 
of  them,  as  the  appointed  emblems  of  that  stupendous 
transaction,  on  which  rested  all  their  hopes  of  pardon,  and 
peace  with  God. 

After  the  account,  which  the  inspired  historian  gives  us, 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  35 

of  the  acceptance  of  Abel's  offering,  and  the  rejection  of 
Cain's,  who,  in  consequence  of  "  the  voice  of  his  brother's 
blood  crying  from  the  ground,  went  out  from  the  presence 
of  the  Lord,  a  fugitive  and  vagabond  in  the  earth,"  we  meet 
with  little,  except  Enoch's  translation,  that  is  particularly 
descriptive  of  the  character  of  God's  faithful  people,  till  the 
day  arrived,  when,  "  by  faith,  Noah  being  warned  of  God, 
of  things  not  seen  as  yet,  moved  with  fear,  prepared  an  ark 
to  the  saving  of  his  house,  by  the  which  he  condemned  the 
world,  and  became  heir  of  the  righteousness,  which  is  by 
faith."*    Such  was  the  effect  ascribed  by  an  apostle  to  the 
faith  of  Noah,  who,  notwithstanding  every  appearance  to 
the  contrary,  being  firmly  convinced  that  the  flood  would 
come,  according  to  the  Divine  warning,  went  on  with  his 
awful  preparation,  and  found  that  safety  and  protection  in 
his  righteous  course,  which  were  denied  to  the  world  of 
the  ungodly.     "  His   friends   and   neighbours,    who  had 
either  neglected,  or  presumptuously  derided  his  pious  ad- 
monitions, looked  in  vain  to  him  for  help !    There  was  no 
hiding  place ^  no  refuge  from  the  storm,  but  within  the  ark 
- — and  God  had  shut  the  door.    The  waters,  which  soon 
rose  above  the  highest  hills,  bore  all  away  with  irresitible 
force  ;  -  the  day  of  acceptance  was  over,  and  the  night  of 
judgment  closed  in  for  ever,   on  a  corrupt  and  perverse 
generation."!     But  even  then,   though  the  pillars  of  the 
earth  were  shaken  from  their  foundation,  and  its  apostate 
and  rebellious  inhabitants  were  swept  away  by  the  over- 
whelming deluge,  the  building  of  God,  the  work  of  re- 
demption was  not  overthrown.     The  church  of  the  Re- 
deemer, now  confined  to  eight  persons,  remained  safe  and 
secure  :J  And  as  soon  as  Noah  had  gone  forth  out  of  the 

*  Heb.  xi.  7. 

f  See  this  subject  treated  with  uncominon  strength  and  elegance  of 
expression,  in  Sermons  preached  at  Laura  Chapely  Bath,  during  the  season 
of  Advent,  1799,  by  the  Rev.  Francis'  Randolph,  D.  D. 

I  There  is  a  beautiful  allusion  to  this  circumstance  in  one  of  the 


f&S  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

ark,  and  he  and  all  that  it  contained  were  placed  agaiil 
upon  a  new  world,  we  find  him  entering  on  the  renewed 
duties  of  life,  with  an  act  of  worship  to  his  merciful  Pre- 
server. "  Noah  builded  an  altar  unto  the  Lord,  and  took 
of  every  clean  beast,  and  of  every  clean  fowl,  and  offered 
burat  offerings  on  the  altar."*  From  the  distinction  of 
clemi  beasts  and  fowls,  which  is  here  so  particularly  men- 
tioned, it  is  evident,  that  these  offerings,  as  well  as  this 
distinction,  must  have  been  made  by  divine  appointment ; 
and  the  life  of  these  creatures  was  taken  away,  and  their 
blood  shed,  as  a  merrjonal  of  that  everlasting  covenant, 
through  the  blood  of  wh)  :h,  life  was  to  be  restored  to  man. 
It  v/as  this  divine  lifv-giving  covenant,  the  establishment 
of  ivhich  was  promised  to  Noah  before  the  flood,  and  the 
promise  repeated  after  it  to  him  and  his  sons,  in  the  same 
strong  expressive  terms — ^*'  And  I,"  says  God,  "  behold  I 
establish  tny  covenant  with  you  ;"t  thus  challenging  an  ex- 
clusive property  in  it,  and  pointing  it  out  as  his  own  act 
and  deed;  not  as  a  thing,  which  had  then  only  begun  to 
take  place,  but  had  been  of  long  standing,  and  was  now  by 
this  solemn  promise  so  ratified  and  established,  as  to  give 
the  strongest  ground  of  assurance  that  it  could  not  fail,  but 
would  stand  fast  for  ever. 

We  have  seen  how  the  terms  of  this  covenant  were 
proposed  to  Adam  after  his  fall,  and  means  appointed  for 
preserving  the  remembrance  of  them,  and  confirming  a 
dutiful  dependence  on  them.  With  the  same  view  they 
were  renewed  to  Noah,  both  before  and  after  the  flood ; 
^nd  God,  we  are  told,  was  pleased  to  set  his  bow  in  the 

prayers  of  the  Office  of  Baptism,  wherein  we  beg  of  that  "  Almighty 
God,  who  of  his  great  mercy  did  save  Noah  and  his  family  in  the  ark 
from  perishing  by  water,  that  the  child — or  infant  voyager,  being  deli- 
vered from  his  wrath,  may  be  rece.ved  into  the  arJt  of  Christ's  churck, 
and  so  pass  ihc  waves  of  this  troublesome  ^vorld,  that  finally  he  may  come- 
to  the  land  of  everlasting  life." 

*  Gen.  viii.  30.  f  Gen.  ix.  9. 


Prhmtive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  Sr 

liloud,  as  a  token  of  his  covenant,  a  pledge  of  his  mercy 
to  man,  through  the  merits  and  mediation  of  that  mighty- 
One,  whom  St.  John  saw  sitting  "  on  the  throne  in  heaven, 
and  there  was  a  rainbow  round  about  the  throne."^  Yet 
with  this  emblem  of  God's  power  and  goodness  staring 
them  in  the  face,  the  descendants  of  Noah  soon  began  to 
forsake  the  ways  of  the  Lord,  and  at  last  filled  up  the 
measure  of  their  iniquity,  by  that  idolatrous  confederacy, 
which  occasioned  their  dispersion  at  Babel.  Thus  "  scat- 
tered abroad  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth,"  they  departed 
also  from  the  worship  and  service  of  the  true  God ;  and  all 
would  again  have  been  lost  in  idolatry  and  coiTuption,  had 
not  the  divine  mercy  interposed  for  the  preservation  of 
truth  and  righteousness.  For  this  purpose,  the  wisdom  of 
heaven  judged  it  necessary  to  separate  some  one  individual 
from  the  degenerate  mass  of  tnankind  ;  and  the  person  se- 
lected was  the  patriarch  Abraham,  called  by  God  to  be  the 
father  of  the  church  of  the  Hebrews,  and  of  the  promised 
seed,  which  was  to  bruise  the  head  of  the  serpent.  The 
history  of  this  distinguished  character  exhibits,  as  might 
well  be  expected,  many  wonderful  interpositions  of  divine 
providence,  tending  to  confirm  the  "  precious  promises," 
which  had  been  made  to  Adam  and  Noah,  and  still  afford- 
ing a  clearer  intimation  of  the  council  of  God,  and  a 
stronger  pledge  of  the  immutability  of  his  gracious  purpose 
towards  all  the  families  of  the  eaith.t  We  are  assured  by 
St.  Paul,  that  "  the  gospel  was  preached  unto  Abraham,"J 
when  it  was  not  only  revealed  to  him,  but  that  revelation 
was  also  confirmed  by  an  oath,  that  "  in  his  seed  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  should  be  blessed."  And  the  same 
apostle,  reasoning  on  this  important  subject,  in  his  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  tells  us,  that  *^  when  God  made  promise  to 


*  Rev.  iv.  3. 

t  See  Dr.  Randolph's  excellent  Sermon  on  the  character  of  Abraham, 
I  Gal.  lii.  8, 


S8  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

Abraham,  because  he  could  swear  by  no  greater,  he  sware 
by  himself.  For  men  verily  swear  by  the  greater ;  and  an 
oath  for  confirmation  is  to  them  an  end  of  all  strife: 
wherein  God  willing  more  abundantly  to  show  to  the  heirs 
of  promise  the  immutability  of  his  counsel,  interposed  him- 
self by  an  oath,  that  by  two  immutable  things,  in  which  it 
was  impossible  for  God  to  lie,  we  might  have  a  strong  con* 
solation."^  Now,  what  can  these  two  immutable  things  be, 
but  first,  God's  interposing  himself^  and  then  the  oath^  both 
showing  the  immutability  of  his  counsel  ?  And  how  could 
we  Christians  derive  consolation  from  this  solemn  ti*ansac- 
tion,  unless  it  referred  to  a  covenant  of  mercy,  in  which 
the  whole  race  of  mankind  were  concerned,  and  of  which 
that  partial  exliibition  made  to  Abraliam,  was  only  designed 
to  preserve  the  memory,  and  secure  the  benefits  of  it  to 
him  and  his  posterity,  till  the  seed  should  come,  to  whom 
the  first  promise  was  made  ;  even  tliat  promise  which  was 
also  ratified  with  an  oath,  and  of  which  it  is  said — "  Jeho- 
vah hath  sworn,  and  will  not  repent,  thou  art  a  priest  for 
ever,  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek."'f  St.  Paul  has 
clearlv  pointed  out  the  person  here  referred  to,  and  the  na- 
ture of  that  unchangeable  priesthood,  which,  according  to 
the  terms  of  the  everlasting  covenant,  confirmed  and  even 
sworn  to  by  the  adorable  Three  in  Jehovah,  was  to  remove 
the  curse  from,  and  procure  a  blessing  to,  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth.  Even  Abraham  himself  was  blessed  by  this 
Melchizedek,  priest  of  the  most  High  God;  and  beholding 
his  promised  Redeemer  under  that  mysterious  character, 
he  rejoiced  to  see  the  day  of  his  incarnation,  and  our  Sa- 
viour himself  assured  the  Jews,  that  "  he  saw  it  and  was 
glad,''''X  It  was  with  a  view  of  enforcing  conviction  on  his 
unbelieving  countrymen,  and  showing  how  strangely  they 
had  departed  from  the  faith  of  their  ancestors,  that  our 
Lord  gave  them  this  assurance  ;  thus  proving  himself  to 

*"  Heb.  vi.  13,  16, 17,  18.         f  I'salm  ex.  4,  \  St.  John  viii.  56. 


Frimitii^  Truth  ami  Order  vindicated,  39 

have  been  the  object  of  hope  and  dependence  to  their 
venerable  progenitor,  and  that  all  the  predictions  and  pro- 
mises made  to  the  faithful  Abraham,  were  now  fulfilled 
in  him,  whom  yet  they  would  not  believe,  because  he  told 
them  the  truth.  Very  different  were  the  opinion  and  be- 
haviour of  one  of  their  own  priests,  the  father  of  John  the 
Baptist,  who,  on  the  birth  of  his  son,  as  the  appointed 
forerunner  of  the  Messiah,  gave  thanks  to  the  "  Lord  God 
of  Israel,  because  in  visiting  and  redeeming  his  people,  he 
had  remembered  his  holy  covenant,  and  the  oath  which  he 
sware  to  their  father  Abraham."^^  From  the  subject  of 
this  oath,  as  described  in  what  follows,  it  is  evident,  that 
Zacharias,  on  this  remarkable  occasion,  was  taught  and 
directed  by  the  holy  Spirit,  to  celebrate  the  redemption  of 
the  world  by  the  promised  Saviour,  as  the  great  object  of 
God's  holy  covenant,  ratified  by  the  oath  of  Jehovah,  and 
shadowed  out  in  all  the  types  and  figures  which  exhibited 
to  the  eye  of  faith  that  "  tender  mercy  of  our  God,  whereby 
the  day-spring  from  on  high  hath  visited  us,  to  give  light 
to  them  that  sit  in  darkness,  and  in  the  shadow  of  death, 
and  to  guide  our  feet  into  the  way  of  peace."t 

This  was  the  mercy  which,  Zacharias  could  say,  was 
"  promi&ed  to  our  fathers,"  and  spoken  of  by  all  the  holy 
prophets,  from  the  beginning  of  the  world.  On  these  pro- 
mises and  predictions  was  built  that  strong  and  vigorous 
faith,  which  supported  the  patriarchs  in  all  their  trials  ;  and 
in  which  they  lived  and  died,  looking  forward,  by  the  light 
which  they  enjoyed,  to  that  salvation,  which  they  knew 
was  prepared,  and  would  in  due  time  be  manifested,  "  be- 
fore the  face  of  all  people."  It  was  this  light,  which  con- 
ducted the  faithful  Abraham  to  one  of  the  mountains  of 
Moriah  ;  whither  he  was  ordered  by  God  to  "  take  his  son, 
his  only  son  Isaac,  whom  he  loved,  and  offer  him  there 
for  a  burnt-offering  :"J  And  "  by  faith,"  says  the  Apos- 

'  St.  Luke  i,  73;  73.        t  3t.  Luke  i.  78,  79-        ^  Gen.  xxli.  2: 


40  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

tie,  "  Abraham,  when  he  ^yas  tried^  offered  up  Isaac  ;  and 
he  that  had  received  the  promises,  offered  up  his  onhj 
begotten  son^  of  whom  it  was  said,  that  in  Isaac  shall  thy 
seed  be  called ;  accounting,  that  God  was  able  to  raise  him 
up  even  from  the  dead;  from  whence  also  he  received  him 
in  a  figure  :"*  or  more  literally,  in  a  parable^  where  some- 
thing more  is  meant  than  that  which  is  expressed.  The 
impending  death,  and  unexpected  deliverance  of  Isaac, 
the  only  begotten  son  of  Abraham,  are  the  things  here  re- 
lated :  but  the  actual  sacrifice,  and  resurrection  of  Christ, 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  are  the  things  which  are 
also  meant  to  be  pointed  out,  with  all  the  circumstances  in 
which  these  will  be  found  to  agree  with  what  is  recorded 
of  Isaac  ;  of  whom  "  God  said  unto  Abraham — In  Isaac 
shall  thy  seed  be  called,"  and  St.  Paul  affirms,  that  this 
seed  "  is  Christ."t 

As  it  is  particularly  mentioned  in  the  histoiy  of  these 
patriarchs,  that  "  after  the  death  of  Abraham,  God  blessed 
his  son  Isaac,"J  as  the  type  or  representative  of  the  pro- 
mised seed  ;  so  when  Isaac  was  old,  and  had  blessed  his 
son  Jacob,  as  chosen  of  God  for  the  same  purpose,  we  are 
informed  of  a  very  striking  vision,  in  which  "  Jacob  be- 
held a  ladder  set  upon  the  earth,  and  the  top  of  it  reached 
to  heaven,  and  behold,  the  angels  of  God  ascending  and 
descending  upon  it ;  and  behold,  the  Lord  stood  above  it, 
and  said — I  am  the  Lord  God  of  Abraham  thy  father,  and 
the  God  of  Isaac  :"§  after  which  follows  a  renewal  of  the 
promise  made  to  both  these  fathers — "  In  thee,  and  in  thy 
seed,  shall  all  the  families  of  the  eartli  be  blessed."  So 
this  vision,  with  the  blessing  which  accompanied  it,  was 
intended  to  confirm  the  patriarch's  hope  and  trust  in  the 
one  Mediator  between  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ 
Jesus;  who  himself  alluded  to  this  symbolical  appearance, 

*  Hcb.  xi.  \7,  18,  19.  \  Gen.  XXV.  11, 

t  Gen.  x.\i.  12,  and  Gal.  iii.  16,  §  Gcn.  xxviii.  12.  15. 


jPnmttive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  41 

when  he  said  to  Nathanael— «an  Israelite  indeed — "  Here- 
after you  shall  see,"  what  Jacob's  vision  prefigured,  ^^  Hea- 
■fen  open,  and  the  angels  of  God  ascending  and  descend* 
ing,"  not  on  a  ladder,  but  on  him  that  was  represented  by 
it — "•  upon  the  Son  of  man."^  But  this  was  not  the  only 
encouraging  assurance,  which  the  patriarch  Jacob  received, 
that  the  "  God  of  Bet)iel"  was  to  be  "  in  Christ,  reconciling 
all  things  both  in  heaven  and  earth  to  himself."  This  same 
God  was  pleased  soon  after  to  exhibit  a  most  wonderful 
support  to  the  hope  of  his  future  incarnation,  by  appearing 
as  a  man  to  this  distinguished  patriarch,  and  xurestling  ivith 
him,  for  the  sake  of  changing  his  name  from  Jacob  to 
Israel,  and  showing  what  power  he  had  both  with  God  and 
with  men,  as  a  Prince:  alluding  thereby  to  the  name  which 
he  had  just  received ;  for  Israel  properly  signifies — '*"  a 
prince  of  God."f  Though  this  appears  to  have  been  a  very 
mysterious  transaction,  we  can  plainly  discern,  that  the 
person  who  wrestled  with  Jacob  was  a  divine  person, 
even  "  Jehovah  God  of  Hosts."  For  so  we  read  in  the 
book  of  the  prophet  Hosea,  that  "  Jacob  had  power  with 
God;  yea,  he  had  power  over  the  angel,  and  prevailed: 
he  wept,  and  made  supplication  unto  him:  he  found  him  in 
Bethel,  and  there  he  spake  with  us,  even  Jehovah  God  of 
Hosts:  Jehovah  is  his  memorial :"J  Agreeably  to  what  the 
same  God  said  to  Moses — "  Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the 
children  of  Israel; — Jehovah — the  God  of  your  fathers, 
the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 
Jacob,  hath  sent  me  unto  you.  This  is  my  name  for  ever, 
and  this  is  my  memorial  unto  all  generations."]]  From 
which  it  is  evident,  that  this  name  Jehovah  is  his  memo^ 
rial,  his  appropriate,  perpetual,  incommunicable  name ; 
and  what  follows  is  "  a  most  gracious  declaration  of  this 
Jehovah's  peculiar  connections  with  the  fathers  of  the  Isra- 


*  St.  John  i.  51.  I  Hosea  xii.  3,  4,  5. 

t  Gen.  Kxxii.  24—29.  I  Exod.  iii.  15. 


4St  Prlfnitiife  Truth  and  Order  vindicate. 

elites."*  Depending  as  he  well  might  on  this  po'tverful 
connection  with  Jehovah,  as  his  Gody  we  find  "  Jacoh^ 
when  he  was  a  dying,  by  faith  blessing  both  the  sons  of 


•  So  says  one  of  the  ablest  biblical  scholars  of  the  age,  the  profoundly 
learned   Dr.  Horsley,   lately   Lord   Bishop  cf  Rochester,   now  of  St. 
Asaph;  who,  in  an  advertisement  at  the  end  of  his  admirable  translatioa 
of  Hosea,  adds  the  following  Remark  to  his  note  on  the  word  "  memo- 
rial" (F.  p.  143.)  which  most  beautifully  illustrates  cur  present  subject : 
namely — That  the  person,  of  whom  it  is  said,  that  the  name  Jehovah 
is  his  memorial,   is  no   other   than  he  whom  the  patriarch  found   at 
Bethel,  who  there  spake  with  the  Israelites  in  the  loins  of  their  pro- 
genitor.    He,  whom  the  patriarch  found  at  Bethel,  who  there,  in  that 
manner,  spake  with  the  Israel  tes,  was  by  the   tenor  of  the  context, 
the  antagonist,  with  whom  Jacob  was  afterwards  matched  at  Pcniel. 
The  antagonist,  with  whom  he  was  matched  at  Peniei,  wrestled  with 
the  patriarch,  as  we  read  it  the  book  of  Genesis,  in  the  human  form* 
The  conflict  was  no  sooner  ended,  than  the  patriarch  acknowledged  his 
antagonist  as  God.     The  holy  prophet  first  calls  him  angel, f  and  after 
mention  of  the  colluctation,  and  of  the  meeting  and  conference  at  Be- 
thel, says4  that  he.  Whom  he  had  called  angel,  was  "  Jehovah  God  oC 
Hosts."     And  to  make  the  assertion  of  this  person's  godhead,  if  possi- 
ble, still  more  unequivocal,  he  adds — that  to  him  belonged,  as  his  ap- 
propriate memorial,  that  name,  which  is  declarative  of  the  very  essence 
of -the  Godhead!     This  MAN,  therefore,  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  this 
ANGEL  of  Hosea,  who  wrestled  with  Jacob,  could  be  no  other  than  the 
Jehcvah- Angel,  of  whom  we  so  often  read  in  the  English  bible,  under  the 
name  of  the  "  angel  of  the  Lord."   A  phrase  of  an  unfortunate  structure, 
and  so  ill  conformed  to  the  original,  that  it  is  to  be  feared,  it  has  led 
many  into  the  error  of  conceiving  of  the  Lord  as  one  person,  and  of  the 
angel  as  another.     The  word  of  the  Hebrews,  ill  rendered  **  the  Lord," 
is  not,  like  the  English  word,  an  appellative  expressing  rank  or  condi- 
tion ;  but  it  is  the  proper  name  yebovah.    And  this  proper  name  Jebova/i 
is  not,  in  the  Hebrew,  a  genitive  after  the  noun  substantive  "  Angel,"  as 
the  English  represents  it ; — but  tlie  words  in  the  Hebrew  translated  Je- 
hovab  and  Angel,  are  two  nouns  substantive  in  apposition,  both  speaking 
of  the  same  person  ;  the  one,  by  the  appropriate  name  of  the  essence,  tlie 
other  by  a  tide  of  oflice.    •'  yehovah-Angsl'*  would  be  a  better  rendering. 
The  Jehovah- Angel  of  the  Old  Testament  is  no  other  than  He,  who  in 
the  fulness  of  time,  "  was  incarnate  by  the  Holy  Ghost  of  the  Virgirr 
Mary," 

•f  Hosea  xji.  4  |  Hosea  xii,  5. 


Primitive  Tfuth  and  Order  vindicated.  43 

Joseph  ;"*  and  in  so  doing,  addressing  himself  to  that 
**  God,  before  whom  his  fathers  Abraham  and  Isaac  did 
walk ;  the  God,  which  fed  him  all  his  life  long,  the  Angel 
which  redeefned  him  from  all  evil;"t  which  plainly  showed 
that  the  hope  of  a  Redeemer^  under  the  character  of  the 
Shepherd  of  Israel  feeding  his  flock  with  all  good  things, 
was  to  be  handed  down  in  the  family  of  Joseph ;  whose 
typical  history  sensed  to  confirm  that  "  hope  of  the  promise 
made  of  God  unto  the  fathers ;  unto  which  promise,"  says 
St.  Paul,  "  our  twelve  tribes,  instantiy  serving  God  day 
and  night,  hope  to  come."J 

The  history  of  these  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  as  recorded 
in  the  sacred  writings,  opens  to  us  a  wonderful  source  oi 
evidence  in  support  of  the  proposition  now  before  us :  And 
by  considering  what  these  people  were;  how  they  were 
supported  by  the  power,  directed  by  the  wisdom,  and  in- 
etructed  in  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah  the  true  God,  we 
shall  readily  perceive  their  t^^Dical  relation  to  his  Christ, 
the  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  the  proof,  which  their  whole 
economy  clearly  exhibits,  that  the  religion  of  this  Saviour 
was  the  same  yesterday  under  the  law,  as  it  is  to-day  under 
the  gospel,  and  will  continue  for  ever^  even  unto  the  end 
of  the  world. 

The  rise  and  progress  of  the  Jewish  nation  is  cue  of  the 
most  surjDrising  things  to  be  met  with  in  the  page  of  history. 
Descended  from  these  distinguished  patriarchs,  whose  faith 
and  piet}^  we  have  been  now  contemplating,  they  were 
taught  to  look  upon  themselves  as  the  peculiar  objects  of 
his  providential  care,  who  had  so  often  declared  himself  to 
be  "  the  God  of  Abrahani,  Isaac  and  Jacob." — Conducted 
by  his  merciful  providence  into  the  land  of  Eg\^t,  they 
were  there  reduced  to  the  most  humiliating  state  of  bon- 
(iage^  from  which  they  could  find  no  relief,  till  the  four 
hundred  years  were  expired,  which,  in  the  wise  and  mys- 

*  Heb.  xi.  21.  t  Gen.  xlviii.  15,  16.  I  Acts  xxvi.  6,  7, 


44  Prhnitive  Truth  and  Order  vwScated, 

terious  designs  of  heaven,  had  been  fixed  as  the  period  of* 
their  affliction.  Emerging  at  last  from  this  grievous  depth 
of  servitude,  and  delivered  from  their  cruel  oppressors  by 
a  most  miraculous  displav  of  Aimighty  vengeance,  they  be- 
came a  great  and  powerful  people ;  possessed  their  promised 
land  for  many  years,  with  the  full  exercise  of  their  religion, 
and  in  the  firm  i^elief,  derived  from  their  sacred  writings, 
that  an  extraordinary  person,  of  their  blood  and  kindred, 
was  to  arise,  who  should  deliver  them  from  all  their  ene* 
mits,  and  set  upon  a  kingdom  above  all  the  kingdoms  of 
the  earth.  Encouraged  by  this  opinion,  and  totally  mis- 
apprehending the  character  of  their  expected  Deliverer, 
they  rejected  him,  when  he  came;  and  quarrelling  with  the 
power  which  had  them  in  subjection,  after  the  most  obsti- 
nate defence  that  ever  people  made,  they  were  utterly  over- 
thrown, their  city  and  temple  destroyed,  and  those  that 
escaped  the  sword,  were  scattered  among  all  nations ; 
%vhere  their  posterity  continue  to  this  day,  cut  off  from  all 
the  powers  and  privileges  possessed  by  those  among  whom 
they  reside  ;  distinguished  only  by  their  pecuhar  obser- 
vances, and  a  firm  conviction,  that  their  religion  is  from 
God,  and  their  great  Deliverer  is  still  to  come. 

These  are  wonderful  circumstances,  and  call  for  extraor- 
dinary attention.  They  afford  the  strongest  arguments  in 
favour  of  the  Christian  religion  ;  since  all  that  has  hap- 
pened to  these  scattered  tribes  of  Israel  was  distinctly  and 
repeatedly  foretold  in  those  scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testement,  on  whose  combined  evidence,  the  truth  of  our 
glorious  gospel  rests  with  unshaken  firmness.  Often  do 
we  find  it  predicted  in  these  sacred  records,  that  the  Jews 
should  not  oiily  despise  and  reject,  and  even  put  to  death 
the  promised  Messiah,  and  on  this  account  be  dispersed 
into  all  coimtries,  and  exposed  to  the  gi*eatest  hardships ; 
but  also,  that  they  should  not  be  swallowed  up,  and  lost 
among  their  conquerors,  as  has  gne rally  been  the  case 
with  all  vanquished  nations,  but  should  still  subsist  to  latest 


Primithe  Truth  and  Order  vindicatedf.  45 

times,  nrd  under  all  their  distresses  and  difficulties,  be  a 
distinct  people.  And  how  amazingly  has  this  prophecy 
been  fulfilled!  Yet  the  pen,  which  divine  inspiration 
guides,  could  hardly  have  pointed  to  a  more  singular  or 
improbable  occurrence.  Nothing  has  happened  like  it  in 
the  course  of  human  affairs.  All  the  mighty  monarchies, 
both  of  the  east  and  west,  are  vanished  like  the  shadows 
of  the  evening,  with  the  setting  sun  ;  their  places  know 
them  no  more ;  while  this  contemptible  race  of  fugitives 
sre  strangely  secure  without  a  friend  or  protector  amidst 
the  wreck  of  empires.  There  are  some  people  now,  as  in 
our  Saviour's  time,  who  "  will  not  believe,  except  they  see 
signs  and  wonders."  Let  them  look  at  this  prodigy,  which 
is  daily  in  their  view,  and  try  if  they  can  possibly  account 
for  it  in  any  other  way  than  by  allowing  it  to  be  "  the 
Lord's  doing,  and,  therefore,  so  mar\^ellous  in  our  eyes." 

Marvellous  indeed  must  it  appear,  that  a  people  so  highly 
favoured  of  God  ;  selected  from  all  others  to  be  his  pecu- 
liar charge,  and  by  his  mighty  hand  rescued  from  bond- 
age ;  conducted  through  numberless  dangers  and  difficul- 
ties, and  at  length  settled  in  a  country  destined  for  their 
habitation,  and  there  constituted  the  guardians,  as  we  may 
say,  of  the  divine  oracles  and  institutions,  should  yet 
abandon  the  great  object,  which  all  these  marks  of  distinc- 
tion had  in  view  ;  be  totally  expelled  from  the  land,  which 
the  Lord  their  God  had  given  them,  and  rendered  wholly 
incapable  of  peifonning  the  peculiar  rites  of  their  religious 
service ;  having  neither  altar,  priest,  nor  temple,  nor  any 
vestige  left  of  v/hat  the  law  required  for  making  their  so- 
lemn sacrifice.  Does  not  all  this  plainly  show  that  the  law 
of  Moses,  in  this  respect,  being  already  fulfilled,  has  no  more 
its  original  end  to  answer ;  and  that  the  whole  Jewish  eco- 
nomy, being  but  the  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,  has 
very  properly  given  place  to  the  substance — to  "  the  body 
which  is  of  Christ  f  ^  He  was  the  real,  permanent  object 
*  Cd.  ii.  m 


46  Primitive  Truth  mid  Order  vindict^ed. 

shadowed  out  by  all  these  figurative,  temporary  represen- 
tations of  the  Mosaic  ritual ;  and  the  whole  order  of  the 
sacrifices,  the  whole  disposition  of  the  tahemacle,  the 
whole  ministry  of  the  priesthood,  pointed  to  him  as  the 
*'  one  true  propitiatory  sacrifice,  the  true  tabernacle,  whidi 
the  Lord  pitched,  and  not  man — the  eternal  High  Priest, 
who  is  passed  into  the  heavens,  there  to  make  continual  in-^ 
tsercession  for  them  that  come  to  God  by  him."  To  him 
give  all  the  types  of  the  law,  as  well  as  *^  all  the  prophets 
witness ;"  and  it  was  solely  on  his  account,  that  the  people 
of  Israel  were  kept  together,  and  supported  by  a  train  of 
miracles ;  for  on  his  leaving  the  world,  when  his  work 
here  below  was  finished,  this  chosen  nation  was  dispersed 
over  all  the  earth,  and  its  policy  completely  dissolved. 

Such  then  being  the  true  nature  of  the  leg-al  dispensation, 
and  such  the  design  of  the  whole  Israelitish  economy,  the 
question  needs  no  longer  be  asked—"  Wherefore  then 
Berveth  the  law  V  The  same  Apostle,  who  states  the  ques- 
tion, gives  also  the  proper  answer ;  when  speaking  of  the 
promise  of  mercy  made  to  Abraliam,  he  tells  us,  that  the 
law  was  "  added  because  of  transgressions,  till  the  seed 
should  come,"  that  is,  Christ,  "  to  whom  the  promise  was 
made."*  By  saying  that  the  law  zvas  added^  he  plainly  in^^ 
timates,  that  there  was  something  known  and  practised  be- 
fore, to  which  this  addition  was  made  ;  and  what  could 
^at  be,  but  the  evangelical  promise  renewed  to  Abraham, 
and  the  worship  and  obedience  required,  in  consequence 
of  that  promise,  to  which  the  law  was  added  by  way  of 
preservation,  and  in  order  to  lessen  transgression  for  the 
time  to  come  ?  Through  the  con-uption  of  the  patriarc  hal 
teligion,  many  sorts  of  transgression  prevailed  among  .he 
heathen  nations,  who  took  their  rise  from  the  confusion  at 
Babel,  and  grew  up  into  the  wildest  idolaters,  worshipping 
their  imaginary  deities  with  such  abominable  practices  as 

*  Gal.  iii.  19. 


Prhmtive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  4f . 

made  them  hateful  to  the  true  God,  and  of  course  very 
dangerous  neighbours  to  those  who  still  believed  in  him, 
and  adhered  to  his  service.  For  this  reason  God  was 
pleased  to  raise  a  wall  of  division  between  the  Hebrews 
and  the  heathens,  and  laid  his  people  under  every  possible 
obligation  that  might  preserve  them  from  mingling  with 
those  that  served  other  gods,  and  learning  their  w  lys. 
As  a  wise  and  good  parent  would  keep  his  children  fiom 
the  seducing  company  of  profligates  and  blasphemers,  so 
did  the  Almighty  Father  of  heaven  and  earth  guard  his 
holy  family  from  all  the  abominations  of  that  bewitching 
idolatry,  by  which  they  were  smrounded.  "  Ye  shall  be 
holy  unto  me,"  said  God  to  the  children  of  Israel,  "  for  I 
the  Lord  am  holy,  and  have  severed  you  from  other  people, 
that  ye  should  be  mine."* 

Thus  claiming  them  as  his  children,  he  had  also  conde- 
scended to  provide  a  schoolmaster  for  them,  to  teach  them 
the  rudiments  of  heavenly  knowledge,  and  so  train  them 
up  in  the  true  faith  and  fear  of  their  God.  "  The  law," 
says  St.  Paul,  "  was  our  schoolmaster  unto  Church  ;"f 
was  designed  to  instruct  those  who  lived  under  it  in  the 
character  and  office  of  the  expected  IMessiah ;  for  which 
purpose,  as  scholars  are  confined  in  a  school,  so  were  they 
separated  from  the  world,  to  learn  and  practise  continually 
those  signs  and  figures,  by  which  this  wonderful  person 
was  described  to  them.  Nothing  can  be  more  plain  and 
distinct,  than  the  precepts  and  institutions  of  the  law,  if  the 
mere  outward  act  and  observance  of  them  had  been  all  that 
was  required.  Yet  we  find,  it  was  the  fervent  desire  and 
earnest  prayer  of  those  who  had  a  just  sense  of  this  matter, 
that  God  would  teach  them,  and  make  them  to  understand 
the  precepts  of  his  law,  in  which  they  were  commanded  to 
"  meditate  day  and  night."  And  that  this  constant  medita- 
tion was  necessary  to  unravel  the  true  meaning  and  design 

*  Levit.  XX.  2^.  t  Gal.  iii.  24. 


48  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

of  it,  will  sufficiently  appear,  if  we  only  consider  one  of 
its  most  striking  and  solemn  institutions,  the  rite  of  sacri- 
fice, or  shedding  the  blood  of  living  creatures  as  an  offer- 
ing to  God ;  which  surely  required  a  considerable  degree 
of  attention  in  discovering  the  end  and  object  of  it,  as  well 
as  the  disposition  with  which  it  ought  to  be  performed. 
It  is  not  only  contrary  to  the  common  sense  and  reason  of 
mankind,  but  declared  by  an  inspired  Apostle  to  be  abso- 
lutely "  impossible,  that  the  blood  of  bulls,  and  of  goats, 
should  take  away  sins."^— There  was  no  such  inherent 
value  in  the  blood  of  these  victims  ;  nor  could  any  neces- 
sary connection  be  supposed  between  the  slaying  of  these 
or  any  such  creatures,  and  the  saving  of  a  sinner.  But 
then  what  was  wanting  in  their  general  nature,  was  made 
up  by  special  institution;  and  these  animals,  being  once 
devoted  and  set  apart  for  this  service,  acquired  a  new  rela- 
tion, and  of  consequence  a  value  from  the  substance,  of 
which  they  were  only  types  and  shadov/s.  The  offering  of 
these  was  then  only  acceptable  to  the  Deity,  when  it  was 
considered  as  his  own  appointment ;  and  in  consequence  of 
a  due  attention  to  the  hidden  things  of  the  law,  was  per- 
formed with  faith  and  humility,  as  a  memorial  of  that 
Lamb  of  God,  who  was  in  due  time  to  be  manifested^  that 
he  might  take  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself. 

In  contradiction,  however,  to  this  train  of  reasoning,  so 
clearly  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  scripture,  it  has  been 
supposed,  that  the  practice  of  worshipping  the  deity  by 
sacrifice  was  merely  a  human  invention,  and  kindly  ac- 
cepted by  God,  only  in  compliance  with  the  weakness  of 
his  creatures.—- Nay,  it  has  been  assigned  as  one  consider- 
able reason  for  God's  sending  his  Son  into  the  world  to 
take  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself,  that  this  was  a 
wise  and  gracious  condescension  to  that  strong  apprehen- 
sion, and  persuasion,  which  had  so  early  and  universally 

*  Heb.  X.  4. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  'uindicated;  49 

prevailed  among  mankind,  concerning  the  expiation  of  sin, 
and  appeasing  the  offended  Deity  by  sacrifices  of  living 
creatures.  But  can  it  really  be  imagined,  with  any  son  of 
reason  or  propriety,  that  the  all-wise  purposes  of  heaven, 
and  the  unsearchable  counsels  of  God,  should  be  directed 
or  influenced  by  the  vain  conceits  and  inventions  of  men  ; 
or  that  the  customs  of  a  blinded  and  corrupted  world  should 
furnish  a  proper  pattern  for  the  divine  proceedings  !  No, 
certainly:  The  mysterious  dispensation,  which  produced 
the  sacrifice  of  the  Son  of  God,  had  a  much  nobler,  and  a 
more  appropriate  original.  It  was  the  result  of  the  greatest 
mercy  conducted  by  infinite  v/isdom,  and  rests  on  no  other 
foundation  than  the  immutability  of  that  divine  counsel 
which  was  confirmed  by  an  oath  ;  that  everlasting  cove- 
nant for  man's  redemption  entered  into  by  the  adoraI)le 
Three  in  Deity,  before  the  world  began.  This  was  the 
source  of  that  gracious  undertaking,  which  prepared  a 
bodv  for  the  promised  Redeemer,  in  which  he  might  do 
and  suffer  the  will  of  God,  b\-  giving  himself  a  ransom  for 
man  ;  and  from  this  all-sufficient  and  meritorious  sacrifice, 
which  in  the  purpose  of  God  was  offered  from  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,  proceeded  not  only  the  institution  and 
acceptance  of  those  offerings  which  we  read  of,  as  brought 
to  the  Lord  by  his  own  people,  but  also  the  corruption  and 
abuse  of  this  institution,  which  prevailed  among  the  hea- 
thens, and  gave  rise  to  all  their  abominable  superstitions. 
For,  as  has  been  jusdy  observed  in  a  late  excellent  publica- 
tion, "  had  there  been  no  true  religion,  there  could  not 
have  been  any  that  is  false.  Had  there  been  no  divine  in- 
stitutions, superstition  would  have  had  no  foundation  on 
which  to  have  raised  its  imaginary  superstructure.  The 
very  abuse  of  sacrifice,  therefore,  proves  the  divinity  of  its 
origin.  For  to  the  perversion  of  sacred  .radition,  are  the 
corrupdons  of  heathenism  to  be  traced  up  :^    Awd  as  the 

*  ::,ee  p  oOo  of  the  Rev.  Charles  Daubeny's  v  Juine  of  Discourses  on 
Vlie  great  Doctrine  of  Atonemeut,  where  we  meet  with  the  following  very 

7 


50   "'        Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

Deity  repeatedly  and  formally  disclaimed  all  virtue,  consi- 
dered as  inherent  in  the  sacrifices  themselves,  the  Divine 
appointment  of  them  could  have  no  other  object  in  view,  than 
to  direct  the  eye  of  the  offerer  to  that  great  atonement,  which 
the  blood  of  the  slain  animal  was  designed  to  shadow  forth ; 
being  the  appointed  emblem  of  that  precious  blood,  which, 
according  to  the  eternal  purpose,  was  to  redeem  the  life  of 
man.  In  like  manner,"  says  the  same  learned  author,^ 
"  the  offering  up  that  commemorative  sacrifice,  which  cha- 
racterizes the  Christian  altar,  is  an  acknowledgment  on  our 
parts,  that  our  lives  were  forfeited,  and  have  been  re- 
deemed by  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  actually  offered 
up  on  the  cross.  Bread  and  wine  are  but  the  instituted 
emblems,  deriving  all  their  spiritual  efficacy  from  the  rela- 
tion they  bear  to  that  important  transaction,  which  they 
were  appointed  to  represent.  Thus  the  typical  sacrifice  of 
the  Jewish  temple,  and  the  commemorative  one  of  the 
Christian  church,  direct  our  thoughts  to  the  same  divine 
object  of  contemplation  ;  each  in  its  peculiar  way  furnish- 
ing a  figurative  exhibition  of  the  recovery  of  man  from  the 
effects  of  the  fall,  through  the  mediation  of  that  divine 

apposite  note.—"  The  more  this  subject,  the  most  fruitful  in  the  whole 
compass  of  literature,  is  investigated,  the  more  satisfied  shall  we  be, 
that  the  images  of  heathen  idolatry  were  but  the  corruptions,  according 
to  the  imaginations  of  men  at  different  times,  of  that  primitive  symbo- 
lical representation,  originally  set  up  at  the  fall,  for  the  purpose  of  pre- 
serving the  faith,  and  characterizing  the  worship  of  the  true  religion. 
The  reader  has  only  to  go  far  enough  back,  and  he  will  arrive  at  the  same 
divine  fountain,  to  which  the  pure  stream  of  patriarchal  religion,  and  the 
corrupt  one  of  heathenish  superstition  are  to  be  traced  up.  Mr.  Maurice, 
in  his  Dissertation  on  the  Oriental  Trinities  (which  by  bringing  the  coun- 
terfeits, the  Fagan  Triads,  to  prove  the  realities,  thereby  makes  the  cor- 
ruption of  revelation  bear  testimony  to  the  truth  of  it)  has  done  much  in 
assisting  the  reader  in  this  interesting  research.  If  the  reader  would  be 
further  assisted,  he  will  find  more  useful,  because  more  correct,  informa- 
tion upon  it  in  the  7'rinitarian  Analogy,  by  that  most  excellent  divine,  the 
late  William  Jones;"  to  be  found  in  vol.  i.  of  liis  Theological,  Philoso- 
phical and  Miscellaneous  Works,  published  in  1801. 
*  P.  360,  361. 


Primitive  Tnith  and  Order  vindicated.  Si 

person,  who  by  the  all-sufficient  sacrifice  of  himself,  be- 
came the  Redeemer  of  a  lost  world." 

We  have  now  taken  a  short  view  of  the  Jewish  economy, 
or  law  of  Moses,  in  the  light  wherein  St.  Paul  represents 
it ;  not  only  as  a  necessary  addition  to  the  patriarchal  reli- 
gion, for  preserving  God's  people  from  the  idolatry  and 
wickedness  of  the  heathen  nations,  but  also  as  "  a  school- 
master unto  Christ,"  leading  men  by  the  discipline  of  its 
types  and  shadows  to  the  knowledge  of  real  and  substantial 
truths ;  in  which  capacity,  our  Lord  himself  tells  us — that 
"  the  law  prophesied  until  John  the  Baptist ;"  till  he  suc- 
ceeded it  in  that  office,— who  seeing  Jesus  coming  to  him, 
spoke  the  very  language  of  its  institutions,  when  he  said 
— "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the  sin 
of  the  world."* 

This  too  has  been  the  language  of  prophecy  from  the 
very  beginning  of  the  world ;  and  as  soon  as  we  look  into 
the  prophetic  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  we  find  them 
unfolding  the  design  of  the  Redeemer's  coming,  and  the 
process  of  the  redemption  wrought  by  him,  in  the  fullest 
and  most  particular  manner.  We  are  told,  that  a  gi-eat 
Person  was  to  come,  bringing  peace  and  salvation  to  all 
nations;  who  should  be  Immanuel  ov  God  xvit/i  us; — born 
of  a  virgin,  poor  and  obscure,  yet  one  whom  David  calls 
his  Lord; — the  Lord  to  whom  the  temple  belonged, — the 
mighty  God,— -a  great  King, — an  everlasting  Priest— a 
Prophet  like  unto  Moses,  but  much  greater;  who  should 
be  anointed  by  the  spirit  of  the  Lord  God,  to  preach  the 
gospel  to  the  poor,  to  proclaim  liberty  to  the  captives,  and 
comfort  to  the  mourners,  and  to  heal  the  broken-hearted ; 
—who  shoidd  work  miracles  of  the  most  merciful  and  bene- 
ficent kind;  and  yet,  notwithstanding  all  his  power  and 
goodness,  should  be  rejected  by  the  greater  part  of  his 
nation  j  be  despised  and  afflicted ;  a  man  of  soitows,  and 

*  St.Johni.  29. 


S^  Primitive  Truth  and  Orcler  vmcRcated. 

acquainted  with  grief ;  accused  bv  false  witnesses ;  betrayed 
by  an  intimate  friend;  sold  for  thirty  pieces  of  silver; 
treated  by  his  enemies  in  the  most  barbarous  manner,  and 
at  last  put  to  a  shameful  and  tormenting  death ;  while  all 
the  time,  he  should  be  led  like  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter, 
not  opening  his  mouth,  but  to  pray  for  his  enemies,  and 
make  intercession  for  the  transgressors.  All  these  and 
many  more  circumstances  of  the  same  kind  pointed  so 
clearly  to  what  really  happened  in  the  land  of  Judah,  and 
were  so  punctually  fulfilled  in  the  person  of  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth^ that  it  is  astonishing  how  the  Jews  could  overlook  the 
striking  evidence  afforded  by  so  many  plain  and  literal  pre- 
dictions. Perhaps  at  the  time  when  these  things  were  pas- 
sing before  them,  and  they  themselves  were  promoting  the 
accomplishment  of  this  awful  mystery,  they  might  have 
been  so  blinded  by  pride  and  prejudice,  as  not  to  see  or 
consider  what  had  lieen  done,  or  what  they  themselves 
were  doing.  But  after  they  had  got  time  to  reflect  on  all 
that  had  happened,  and  to  compare  it  with  what  had  been 
prophesied ;  we  may  indeed  wonder  how  they  failed  to 
perceive  where  the  truth  lay,  and  honestly  to  confess,  in 
the  words  of  one  of  our  Lord's  first  disciples — "  we  have 
found  him,  of  whom  Moses  in  the  law  and  \k\^  prophets^vS. 
write,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  son  of  Joseph."^ 

It  was  to  Moses  and  the  prophets  that  Abraham  is  repre- 
sented in  the  parable,  as  referring  the  rich  man's  unbeliev- 
ing brethren  for  the  evidence  of  a  future  state  ;t  ^i^^ 
when  Jesus  gave  this  direction  to  his  incredulous  countr}^- 
nien — ''  Search  the  scriptures,  for  in  them,  ye  think  ye 
have  eternal  life,  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me  ;'*J 
they  were  the  writings  of  Moses  and  the  prophets^  the  only 
scriptures  then  known,  which  thus  bore  testimony  to  him, 
as  the  author  of  eternal  life  to  all  them  that  believe.  With 
the  same   view,  we  find  him  kindly  rebuking  two  of  his 

•  St.  John  i.  45.        t  St.  Luke  xvi.  29—31.        \  St..  John  v.  39. 


Pnmithe  Truth  and  Order  vhidkated,  53 

followers,  as  foolishly  backward  to  believe  what  the  pro- 
phets had  spoken  ;  and  then  we  are  told,  that  "  beginning 
at  Moses^  and  all  the  prophets^  he  expounded  unto  them  in 
all  the  s-^riptures,  the  things  concerning  himself."^  In  imi- 
tation of  his  blessed  Master,  we  find  St.  Paul  employed  in 
''  expounding  and  testifying  the  kingdom  of  God,"  to  the 
Jews  at  Rome,  and  "  persuading  them  concerning  Jesus, 
both  out  of  the  law  of  Moses ^  and  out  of  the  prophets r\ 
and  that  this  had  been  his  constant,  and  most  effectual  me- 
thod of  persuasion,  appears  evidently  from  part  of  his  ad- 
mirable defence  before  king  Agrippa  ;  wherein  he  declares, 
that  "  having  obtained  help  of  God,  he  had  continued  unto 
that  day,  witnessing  both  to  small  and  great,  saying  none 
other  things  than  those,  which  the  prophets  and  Moses  did 
sav  should  come  :  that  Christ  should  suffer,  and  that  he 
should  be  the  first  that  should  rise  from  the  dead,  and 
should  show  light  unto  the  people,  and  to  the  Gentiles."^ 

If  then  this  eminent  preacher  of  the  gospel,  in  the  testi- 
mony which  he  bore  to  the  truth  of  it,  said  none  other  things, 
than  what  Moses  and  the  prophets  had  said  should  come, 
with  regard  to  the  sufferings,  and  exaltation  of  the  expected 
Messiah, — the  light  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the  glorv  of  his 
people  Israel ;  the  obvious  and  necessary  inference  to  be 
drawn  from  these  premises  is,  that  there  is  no  other  differ- 
ence between  the  preaching  of  Moses  and  the  prophets, 
and  that  of  an  Apostle  of  Christ,  but  this — that  the 
former  points  to  the  promised  Saviour,  as  yet  to  come ; 
the  latter  exhibits  him  as  already  come. — But  he  is  in  fact 
the  sum  and  substance  of  both  parts  of  divine  revelation ; 
and  what  is  called  the  New  Testament,  containing  the 
writings  of  Apostles  and  Evangelists,  speaks  no  other  lan- 
guage than  what  the  Old  Testament  had  spoken  before  by 
Moses  and  the  prophets,  respecting  the  scheme  of  man's 
salvation^  except  in  so  far  as  relates  to  the  way  and  maimer 

*  St.  Luke  xxiv.  27.        \  Acts  xxviii.  23.         \  Acts  xxvi.  22,  23. 


54  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated* 

in  which  that  gracious  scheme  was  exhibited  to  the  world. 
The  Old  Testament  went  before,  to  announce  what  was 
to  be  delivered  in  the  New  :  and  the  New  Testament  came 
after,  to  interpret  the  Old:  but  both,  like  the  Cherubim 
over  the  mercy  seat,  bear  a  constant  and  friendly  aspect 
towards  each  other,  united  in,  and  intent  upon  carrying 
on,  one  and  the  same  gracious  design  of  promoting  the 
glory  of  God  in  the  salvation  of  men. 

This  is  the  view  in  which  we  are  taught  to  behold  these 
two  dispensations  of  divine  mercy,  as  distinguished  by  the 
characters  of  Old  and  Nexv  ;  not  as  though  they  were  two 
distinct  schemes  of  religion  unconnected  with  each  other, 
but  as  what  they  really  are,  two  parts  of  the  same  beauti- 
ful whole,  mutually  confirming  and  illustrating  each  other ; 
and  to  be  considered  as  Old  and  Nexv^  only  with  respect  to 
the  time  and  manner  of  their  being  manifested  to  the 
world.  It  is  therefore  well  and  wisely  declared  in  the 
seventh  article  of  the  Church  of  England,  that  "  the  Old 
Testament  is  not  contrary  to  the  New ;  for  both  in  the  Old 
and  New  Testament,  everlasting  life  is  offered  to  mankind 
by  Christ,  who  is  the  only  Mediator  between  God  and 
man,  being  both  God  and  man.  Wherefore  they  are  not 
to  be  heard,  which  feign  that  the  old  fathers  did  look  only 
for  transitory  promises."  How  can  it  possibly  be  feigned, 
or  imagined,  that  they  looked  only  for  transitory  pro- 
mises, when  an  inspired  Apostle  expressly  assures  us,  that 
those  whom  he  enumerates  "  all  died  in  faith,  not  having 
received  the  promises,  but  having  seen  them  afar  off,  and 
were  persuaded  of  them,  and  embraced  them,  and  con- 
fessed that  they  were  strangers  and  pilgrims  on  the  earth, 
desiring  a  better  country,  and  looking  forward  to  the  city, 
which  God  hath  prepared  for  them ;  '  even  as  we  Chris- 
tians,' having  here  no  continuing  city,  seek  one  to  come."* 
So  it  is  evident,  that  they  and  we,  having  the  same  object 

»  Heb.  XX.  13—16.  and  xiii.  14,     . 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  55 

in  view,  and  travelling  to  the  same  country,  must  be  di- 
rected to  it  by  the  same  means;  that  is,  by  a  firm  and  steady 
faith  in  him,  who  is  "  the  way,  the  truth  and  the  life  ;"* 
the  way  in  which  we  are  to  walk,  the  truth,  by  which  we  are 
to  be  guided,  and  the  life  in  which  our  journey  is  to  end. 

Although  the  dispensation,  under  which   we  live,  be 
called  the  New  Testament,  we  are  not  to  suppose,  that  it 
differs  in  substance  from  the  0/d^  or  points  to  any  new  way 
of  salvation  which  was  not  known  before.     For  since  the 
fall  of  man,  there  has  been  but  one  way  discovered  for 
his  recovery;  one  scheme  of  mercy,  at  first  revealed  in  the 
promise  of  deliverance  by  the  "  seed  of  the  woman ;" — 
represented  by  the  emblematic  appearance  at  the  east  of 
the  sacred  garden, — and  aftersvards  more  fully  exhibited 
in  the   religious   services,  and  mystical  offerings  of  the 
*'  old  fathers,"  both  before  imd  under  the  law.    These  were 
appointed  to  prefigure^  what  our  eucharistic  service  is 
designed  to  commemorate  as  actually  accomplished  by  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ — "  the  one  oblation  once  offered  for  the 
sins  of  the  whole  world."    Thus  the  Pati'iarchal,  die  Jew- 
ish, and  the  Christian  economy,  will  all  be  found  to  unite  in 
directing  the  eye  of  the  faithful  to  the  same  object  of  evan- 
gelical hope,  from  the  revelation  of  the  promised  seed  to 
Adam  in  paradise,  through  the  shadows  of  the  law,  to  its 
designed  completion  in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ, — "  the 
Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world."    And  when, 
at  the  consummation  of  all  things,  the  Patriarch,  the  Jew, 
and  the  Christian,  shall  be  assembled  before  the  throne 
that  is  set  in  heaven;  as  they  will  all  have  had  but  one 
source  of  hope  here  below,  so  will  they  then  join  in  one  song 
of  praise,  with  the  mystic  powers  on  high — saying — "  Bles- 
«ing,  honour,  glory  and  power  be  unto  him  that  sitteth  oa 
the  throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb  for  ever  and  ever."t 
From  the  account  that  has  now  been  given  of  the  primi- 

*  St.  John  xlv.  6.  t  Rev.  v.  13. 


^6  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

tive  institution  of  religion,  as  founded  in  the  immutable 
counsel  of  that  "  Father  of  lights,  with  whom  is  no  varia- 
bleness, neither  shadow  of  turning ;"  I  think  it  must  evi- 
dently appear,  that  the  way  of  salvation,  which  divine, 
wisdom  has  marked  out  for  the  human  race,  is  no  new 
discovery,  peculiar  to  this  or  that  age  of  the  world.  It  is 
as  old  as  the  "  way  of  the  tree  of  life,"  of  which  a  very 
early  symbol  was  appointed  to  keep  fallen  man  in  remem- 
brance ;  and  with  respect  to  which  the  last  book  of  the  in- 
spired volume  delivers  this  encouraging  promise — "  To 
him  that  overcometh  will  I  give  to  eat  of  the  tree  of  life, 
which  is  in  the  midst  of  the  paradise  of  God."*  The 
same  emblem  is  made  use  of  in  both  cases,  to  show  that 
the  means  of  procuring  life  to  man  have  been  the  sam.e 
from  the  beginning,  and  will  continue  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  Nothing  is  more  likely  to  hurt  the  cause  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  obstruct  its  salutary  influence  on  the  minds  of 
men,  than  the  false  notions,  which  prevail  respecting  its 
original,  and  the  mean,  degrading  ideas,  which  some  are 
disposed  to  entertain  with  regard  to  its  Author,  and  the 
plan  on  which  it  was  preached  and  propagated  in  the  world 
about  eighteen  centuries  ago.  Those  who  view  it  as  a  sys- 
tem, which  was  then  entirely  new,  and  had  never  been 
heard  of  before,  sit  down  very  coolly  to  weigh  its  merits  as 
placed  in  the  balance  with  the  schemes  of  heathen  philoso- 
phy, and  natural  divinity,  which  then  were  or  since  have 
been  set  in  opposition  to  it.  They  do  not  see,  or  are  not 
willing  to  see  that  light  of  evidence,  which  shows  the  truth 
and  purpose  of  the  everlasting  covenant,  entered  into  by 
the  adorable  Three  in  Jehovah  for  man's  redemption,  be- 
fore the  foundations  of  the  world  were  laid.  The}'  overlook 
the  unity  of  this  grand  and  merciful  design,  and  will  not 
observe  that  beautiful  chain  of  connection,  by  which  the 
*'  promise  was  united  with  the  performance,  the  prophecy 

*  Rev.  ii.  7. 


Frimitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  5.7 

iv'ith  the  completion,  the  anticipation  with  the  event  ;"*^ 
jdl  tending  to  illustrate  the  character,  and  display  the  glo- 
ries of  that  Almighty  Deliverer,  who  from  the  very  fall  of 
man,  stood  forth  his  Redeemer  and  Intercessor.  They 
do  not  consider,  that  for  the  manifestation  of  this  wonder- 
fiil  person,  in  whom  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be 
blessed,  there  was  a  fulness  of  time  appointed,  to  which  all 
the  preceding  dispensations  looked  forward  ;  just  as  thera 
is  now  a  fulness  of  time  determined,  to  which  our  views 
ought  to  be  continually  directed,  when  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  will  be  summoned  to  appear  before  the  tribunal  of 
that  "  just  and  righteous  One,"  who  came  first  to  save, 
and  will  at  last  come  to  judge  the  world. 

These  are  the  great  and  interesting  objects,  which  our 
Christian  principles  lead  us  to  contemplate  :  And  when  vfo 
survey  the  imminent  danger  to  which  such  principles  are 
exposed,  from  the  careless  indifference  which  appears  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  wild  enthusiasm  which  breaks  out 
on  the  other,  both  equally  tending  to  sap  the  foundation-^ 
and  destroy  the  purity  of  tlie  Christian  faith ;  surely  we 
cannot  but  see  the  necessity  of  exerting  our  utmost  endea- 
vours to  hold  fast  our  profession,  and  to  fix  the  certainty 
und  security  of  our  belief  on  its  only  solid  basis — ^*'  the  truth 
as  it  is  in  Jesus."  If  his  religion  be  true,  it  must  be  so  in 
every  part  that  is  now  exhibited  to  our  view ;  it  must  have^ 
been  always  so  in  every  period  of  time ;  and  those  several 
objects,  about  which  our  faith  is  exercised,  the  creation, 
the  redemption,  and  the  sanctification  of  man,  were  all 
presented  at  once  to  the  eye  of  Almighty  love ;  they  all 
began  together  in  the  unchangeable  purpose  of  Jehovah,  and 
will  move  on  in  merciful  procession,  as  the  covenanted, 
confederate  work  of  the  glorious  Three  in  one  undivided 
Kssence,  till  time  shall  be  no  more. 

Little  then  are  we  obliged  to  those  teachers  of  natural 
theology,  those  advocates  for  what  is  called  Ratiojial  Reli' 

*  Set  Dr.  Ijlandolph's  Sermons  on  thi?^  subject. 
8 


J  8  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  'vindicated* 

p-'ion.  who  would  take  us  out  of  the  hands  of  out  first,  our 
best,  our  only  safe  instructor,  to  prove  to  us,  that  there  is 
a  God  who  made  us,  and  a  future  state  of  retribution  re- 
served for  us  ;  and  after  carrv  ing  us  to  the  borders  of  that 
awful  state,  there  to  leave  us  without  a  Saviour,  or  a  Sanc- 
tifier,  who  only  can  enable  us  to  pass  the  bounds,  the  great 
gulph  fixed  between  our  fallen  nature  and  a  happy  immor- 
tality. Is  it  thus,  that  the  light  of  the  gospel,  the  meridian 
brightness  of  the  sun  of  righteousness,  is  to  receive  addi- 
tional splendour  from  the  feeble  taper  of  human  reason,  the 
pitiful  glimmering  of  what  is  called  the  Light  of  Nature  ? 
Is  it  thus,  that  philosophy  is  to  be  brought  in,  to  the  aid  of 
religion  ;  and  the  emptiness  of  man's  fluctuating  judgment 
and  understanding  to  be  opposed  to  that  fulness  of  wisdom 
and  knowledge,  which  dwells  for  ever  in  the  most  High  ? 
No  :  it  is  not  by  such  expedients  as  these,  that  the  cause  of 
Christianity  is  to  be  supported,  and  its  influence  promoted 
in  the  world.  We  have  seen  them  tried  in  the  balance,  and 
found  wanting.  God  has  permitted  the  experiment  to  be 
made,  and  under  a  pretence  of  refining  and  improving  the 
religion  of  Christ,  by  explaining  its  doctrines  in  such  a 
rational  manner,  as  may  recommend  it  to  more  general 
acceptance,  a  plan  has  been  carried  on  with  wonderful  suc- 
cess, for  stripping  it  of  all  its  primary  importance,  and  hold- 
ing it  up,  as  but  a  secondary  object  in  the  scale  of  Divine 
Providence.* 


*  This  plan  seems  to  be  recommended  by  Archdeacon  Paley,  who 
maintains  that  "  he,  who  by  a  diligent  and  faithful  examination  of  the 
original  records,  dismisses  from  the  system  one  article,  which  contradicts 
the  apprehension,  the  experience,  or  the  reasoning  of  mankind,  does 
more  towards  recommending  the  belief,  and  with  the  belief,  the  in- 
lluence  of  Christianity,  to  the  understandings  and  consciences  of  seri- 
ous inquirers,  and  through  them  to  universal  reception  and  authority, 
than  can  be  elTected  by  a  thousand  contenders  for  creeds  and  ordinances 
of  human  establishment."  This  no  doubt  is  partly  true,  as  far  as  "  the 
apprehension,  the  experience,  or  the  reasoning  of  mankind"  may  be 
opposed  to  '•  creeds  uad  ordinances  of  human  establishment."    But  are 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  59 

With  this  view,  it  has  been  laid  down  as  an  incontro- 
\^ertible  position,  that  what  is  called  Natural  Religion  con- 
stitutes the  basis  of  revelation,  and  having  therefore  prior 
authority,  must  be  considered  as  of  superior  obligation. 
Accordingly,  its  laws  are  represented  as  eternal  and  un- 
changeable, antecedent  to  the  will  of  God,  and  indepen- 
dent on  it ;  so  perfectly  agreeable  to  reason,  and  the  fitness 
of  things,  that  God  as  well  as  man,  the  Creator  as  well  as 
the  creature,  is  obliged  to  conform  to  them.  The  light  of 
nature  is  thought  to  be  sufficient  for  the  discovery  of  all 
that  is  necessary  to  be  known  respecting  the  will  and  perfec- 
tions of  the  Deity ;  and  as  this  boasted  light  can  only  dis- 
cover what  are  called  moral  duties,  they  are  said  to  carry 
with  them  a  natural  or  eternal  obligation  ;  while  positive 
duties  are  but  mere  arbitrar}-  commands,  void  of  all  inter- 
nal excellency.  These  and  such  like  metaphysical  distinc- 
tions have  been  eagerly  laid  hold  of,  to  establish  the  neces- 
sity of  a  constant  appeal  to  the  tribunal  of  human  reason ; 
and  no  precept  of  scripture  must  be  received  as  a  rule  of 
duty,  till  it  be  proved  to  agree  with  the  dictates  of  philo- 
sophy, and  its  utility  be  tried  by  the  standard  of  human 
wisdom.  By  thus  throwing  so  much  weight  into  the  scale 
of  reason,  and  so  little  into  that  of  revelation,  as  if  every 
one  had  a  right  to  frame  a  religion  for  himself ;  the  autho- 
rity of  scripture  is  daily  more  and  more  weakened  and 
despised,  the  value  of  Christianity  is  proportionably  depre* 

there  no  creeds  and  ordinances  of  divvie  establishment,  every  article  of 
which  must  be  retained  as  part  of  the  Christian  system,  however  contra- 
dictory it  may  appear  to  the  judgment  or  apprehension  of  "  the  natural 
man — the  disputer  of  this  world  ?"  Is  there  not  a  "  faith — once  delivered 
to  the  saints,"  which  must  he  "  early  contended  for  "  by  all  who  hope  to 
share  in  "  the  common  salvation  ?"  and  which  faith,  he  who  maintains 
in  its  purity,  as  founded  on  the  authority  of  God,  does  more  towards 
recommending  the  belief  and  influence  of  true  Christianity,  than  "  a 
thousand  such  contenders"  as  Dr.  Paley,  for  "  the  apprehension,  the 
experience,  or  the  reasoning  of  mankind."  See  the  dedication  of  his 
"  Principles  of  Moral  and  Political  Philosophy  ^**  to  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle. 


itSf  Pfhnltlve  Truth  and  Order  mridtcdt^d, 

ciated ;  infidelity  raises  its  proud  aspiring  head,  and  taking 
advantage  of  the  high  gi'ound  on  which  its  favourite  religion 
of  nature  has  been  (even  by  some  men  of  distinguished 
abilities)  imprudently  placed,  exalts  itself  against  that  true 
knowledge  of  God,  and  divine  things,  which  can  only  be 
derived  from  divine  revelation.* 

Thus  we  niay  plainly  see,  that  nothing  has  done  greater 
mischief  to  our  holy  religion,  than  the  vain  attempts  of  some 
of  its  teachers  to  bring  down  its  exalted  truths  to  the  stand- 
ard of  human  reason;  these  attempts  having  in  some 
measure  invited  its  enemies  to  join  issue  with  those  that 
appear  to  be  friendly  to  it,  that  the  former  may  strengthen 
their  hands  by  the  unguarded  concessions  of  the  latter. — ■ 
So  in  fact  it  has  been  found,  that  some  of  the  strongest, 
•and  most  pointed  attacks  that  have  been  made  on  Christia- 
nity, have  derived  their  chief  strength  from  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  this  principle,  that  natural  religion  is  the  foun- 
dation of  all  that  is  instituted  and  revealed :  a  principle, 
tvhich,  as  some  have  been  pleased  to  consider  as  the  ground 
of  their  faith,  others  have  been  bold  to  hold  forth,  at  least 
with  less  inconsistency,  as  the  support  of  their  infidelity. 
And  if  it  be  true,  as  some  Christian  divines  have  thought 
proper  to  allow,  that  "  unless  all  the  great  things  contained 
in  the  law  of  nature  are  first  known  and  believed,  the  reve- 
lation of  God  himself  can  signify  nothing,"  it  may  no 
doubt  be  afiirmed  with  equal  confidence,  that  where  all  these 
things  are  already  known  and  believed,  revelation  can  sig- 
nify but  little  3     For  if  nature  and  reason  can  so  easily  dis- 


*  If  the  reader  be  desirous  of  obtakking  farther  information  on  this 
interesting  subject,  I  would  beg  leave  to  recommend  him  to  a  work,  in 
the  perusal  of  which  he  will  be  cure  to  receive  both  the  benefit  and 
pleasure  that  must  arise  from  complete  satisfaction,  and  which  is  very 
properly  entitled,  7'be  Kncnaledge  of  Divine  Tbnigs  from  Heveiation,  not 
from  Reason  or  Nature.  By  the  late  John  Ellis,  D.  D.  Vicar  of  St. 
-Catherine's,  Dublin,  and  fovmerly  of  Brazien  Nose  College,  Oxford.. 
l.ondon,  1771. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  6^ 

cover  the  most  important  truths,  and  be  sufficient  to  direct 
man  in  the  way  of  his  duty,  and  lead  him  to  the  happiness 
designed  for  him,  there  does  not  appear  to  be  much  neces- 
sity for  any  other  guide  ;  nay,  there  is  hardly  room  lef"t  for 
any  other,  where  the  mind  is  already  preoccupied  with  the 
sufficiency  of  its  own  powers,  and  feels  itself  in  possession 
of  every  religious  truth  that  is  worth  the  inquiring  after. 
The  consequence  of  all  this  must  be,  that  in  proportion  as 
reason  is  exalted,  and  the  comprehension  of  the  human 
mind  enlarged  beyond  its  proper  limits,  the  importance 
and  value  of  revelation  will  be  just  so  far  depressed  and 
under-rated,  till  at  last  reason  becomes  absolutely  indepen- 
dent and  self-sufficient,  and  will  either  have  a  religion  en- 
tirely of  its  own  devising,  or  none  at  all. 

Thus  does  the  pride  of  human  nature  tempt  men  to  em- 
ploy the  reason  which  God  has  given  them,  in  direct  oppo- 
sition to  the  will  and  intention  of  the  Giver,  without  consi- 
dering the  folly  and  baseness  of  such  unworthy  conduct, 
and  into  what  gross  absurdities  it  must  infallibly  lead  them. 
If  these  men  would  know  what  reason  is  without  revelation, 
and  to  what  it  would  lead  them  in  matters  of  religion,  if 
unassisted,  and  left  to  itself,  let  them  consult  the  histories 
of  those  heathen  nations,  who  knew  nothing  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, while  it  was  the  only  scripture,  or  who  since  then 
have  never  heard  of  Christ  and  his  gospel.  There  they 
will  soon  discover  what  strange  work  their  idol  reason  has 
made  in  the  world ;  how  it  has  multiplied  Deities  like  die 
sand  of  the  sea,  and  "  changed  the  glory  of  the  incorrup- 
tible God,  into  an  image  made  like  to  corruptible  man,  and 
to  birds,  and  four-footed  beasts,  and  creeping  things  j"*" 
how  it  has  led  men  to  offer  sacrifice  unto  devils,  in  a  va- 
riety of  forms,  and  in  the  most  inhuman  and  bai-baj'ous 
manner ;  and,  in  a  word,  that  there  is  scarce  any  thing  so 
absurd  and  ridiculous,  or  so  monstrous  and  abominable, 


Rom. 


62  I^rbnithe  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

but  what  the  vahi,  self-sufficient  reason  of  man  has  made 
an  object  of  religious  worship. 

To  use  the  words,  therefoi'e,  of  a  late  admirable  address  to 
the  patrons  and  professors  of  the  new  philosophy:  "  Let 
the  modern  reasoner,  who  would  make  as  good  a  religion 
by  the  help  of  nature,  and  his  own  faculties,  as  we  have 
received  from  the  lights  of  revelation,  and  the  doctrines  of 
the  gospel,  take  his  ground  where  he  will,  provided  he  does 
not  go  without  the  heathen  pale;  and  let  him  keep  it. — Let 
liim  borrow  no  assistance  from  Moses,  and  let  him  assume 
to  himself  all  the  lights  that  he  can  find,  all  the  rational 
religion  he  can  collect,  not  only  in  the  world  then  known, 
but  in  the  world  since  discovered,  in  all  the  nations  of  the 
east,  where  reason  surely,  as  far  as  arts  and  sciences  were 
concerned,  was  in  no  contemptible  state ;  in  America,  to  the 
north  and  to  the  south,  in  all  the  continents  and  islands^ 
■\\rhich  modern  navigation  has  added  to  the  map  of  the 
world,  as  the  Romans  knew  in  the  Augustan  age  ;  let  him 
pursue  his  researches,  and  when  he  has  made  his  tour 
through  all  their  temples  and  pagodas,  let  him  erect  his 
trophies  to  reason,  and  publish  his  discoveries  with  what 
confidence  he  may.  Alas !  for  mankind,  and  the  boasted 
dignity  of  human  reason,  he  will  bring  back  nothing  but  a 
raree-show  of  idols,  a  museum  of  monsters,  Egyptian, 
Indian  and  Chinese  deformities,  and  non-descripts,  the 
creatures  of  earth,  air  and  sea,  snakes,  reptiles,  even  stocks 
and  stones  promoted  to  be  gods,  and  man  degenerating, 
and  debasing  himself  to  kneel  down  before  these  dumb 
divinities,  and  pay  them  worship. — And  now,  if  this  is  all 
that  he,  who  opposes  the  religion  of  revelation,  can  disco- 
ver, and  make  prize  of  in  the  religion  of  reason,  I  give 
him  joy  of  his  discoveries,  and  wish  him  candidly  to  de- 
clare, if  upon  result  of  those  discoveries,  he  can  believe 
so  well  of  himself  as  to  suppose,  that  had  he  lived  in  those 
days,  he  would  have  found  out  any  thing  more  than  was 
found  out  by  those  who  lived  in  them :   whether,  if  he  had 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  63 

singly  engrossed  the  collected  wisdom  of  the  seven  wise 
men  of  Greece,  he  would  have  revealed  a  better  system  of 
religion  to  the  world  than  Christ  has  revealed  ;  and  whe- 
ther he  would  have  known  the  will  of  God  better  than  God 
knew  it  himself,  and  more  clearly  have  communicated  it  to 
mankind."^ 

Whoever  duly  considers  the  scope  and  force  of  this  rea- 
soning, can  be  at  no  loss  to  discover  the  obvious  conclusion 
in  favour  of  divine  revelation ;  to  which  it  is  evident,  that 
men  are  indebted  for  all  that  pretended  religion  of  nature 
which  they  so  fondly  boast  of,  and  which  is  no  other  than 
what  they  derived  from  the  use  of  the  sacred  writings,  and 
the  instiTiction  received  from  those  who  had  the  care  of 
their  education.  Thus  the  revealed  truths,  which  took 
early  possession  of  their  souls,  which  they  were  taught 
with  the  first  rudiments  of  learning,  and  of  which  no  per- 
son living  in  a  Christian  country  can  be  supposed  wholly 
ignorant ;  these  they  mistake  for  the  pure  natural  conceptions 
of  their  own  minds,  and  ascribe  to  reason,  and  the  light  of 
nature,  that  very  knowledge  of  divine  things  which  they 
have  derived  from  the  gospel  of  Christ,  and  which  they  yet 
set  up  in  opposition  to  it.  But  is  it  right  and  reasonable 
to  treat  in  such  a  disingenuous  manner  the  religion  of  him, 
who  came  to  be,  and  actually  proved  himself  to  be  the 
light,  and  life  of  the  world?  "  Ought  the  withered  hand, 
which  Christ  has  restored  and  made  whole,  to  be  lifted  up 
against  him? — Or  should  the  dumb  man's  tongue,  just 
loosened  from  the  bonds  of  silence,  blaspheme  the  power 
that  set  it  free  ?"t  Yet  thus  basely  do  these  men  act,  who 
employ  the  knowledge  which  they  have  from  scripture, 
against  scripture  itself,  and  make  use  of  their  religion  of 
nature,  as  an  engine  to  batter  down  the  religion  of  Christ. 

*  See  this  subject  farther  pursued  and  ilKistrated  in  an  excellent  little 
tract,  called,  Afevi  plain  Reasons  viby  voe  should  believe  in  Christ,  and 
adhere  to  his  Religion.     By  Richard  Cumberland,  Esq.     London,  19dh 

t  See  Bishop  Sherlock's  Discourses  on  this  subject. 


64  Primiiivb  Truth  and  Order  vindicated^ 

But  little  do  these  men  consider  what  it  really  is,  which ^ 
under  the  name  of  Natural Religioriy  they  thus  fondly  ad- 
mire, as  such  a  powerful  weapon  in  the  hands  of  infidelity: 
Little  indeed  do  they  seem  to  know  of  the  true  state  of 
that  nature  from  which  they  would  derive  this  imaginary 
religion.  For  how  can  that  system  of  religion  be  called 
natural^  which  was  never  yet  discovered  by  any  of  the 
sons  of  men,  while  left  to  themselves  in  a  state  of  nature^ 
without  a  guide  or  instructor  ?  Or  if  it  could  have  been 
discovered  by  men  thus  uninstructed  and  untutored,  yet 
how  could  such  a  religion  be  suited  to  man  in  his  present 
state,  which  takes  no  notice  of  any  change  that  has  hap- 
pened to  him,  but  supposes  him  to  be  still  in  that  pure^ 
holy  and  happy  condition,  in  which  he  came  originally 
from  the  hands  of  a  pure  and  holy  God,  and,  therefore, 
capable  of  performing  such  a  worship  and  service  as  that 
God  requires,  and  will  accept  from  an  innocent,  unoffend- 
ing creature  ?  No  proposition,  I  think,  can  be  more  clear 
and  evident  than  this  ;  that  Natural  Religion^  if  it  has  any 
meaning  at  all,  must  mean  that  religion  which  is  fitted  for, 
and  peculiar  to  the  present  state  of  man's  nature,  as  some- 
thing very  different  from  that,  in  which  he  first  received 
his  being.  But  how  can  that  be  deemed  a  religion  at  all 
calculated  for  man  in  his  present  state,  which  leaves  out  of 
the  account  the  doctrines  of  his  Jail  and  his  restoration ; 
which  never  tells,  nor  can  tell  him,  how  he  died  in  Adam, 
and  was  and  will  be  made  alive  again  in  Christ  ?  That  "  in 
Adam  all  died,"  and  in  consequence  of  the  mortal  nature 
received  from  their  first  parent,  all  his  posterity  are  liable 
to  death,  is  a  truth  no  less  confirmed  by  experience,  than 
plainly  declared  in  holy  writ.  But  the  cause,  as  well  as  the 
sting,  of  death  is  sin ;  and  how  sin  can  be  pardoned,  and 
its  effects  removed  from  the  sinner,  no  light  of  nature  has 
ever  been  able  to  show,  nor  give  any  glimpse  of  hope,  but 
what  may  arise  from  the  dark,  uncertain  prospect  afforded 
by  repentance  ;;  of  which  it  can  only  be  said,  "  who  can  tell 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  65 

if  God  will  accept  it?"  God  alone  could  tell  the  terms 
on  which  "  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  were  to  be 
preached  among  all  nations ;  and  it  behoved  Christ  to 
suffer,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead  the  third  day,"*  that  in 
his  name^  the  promise  of  this  universal  blessing  might  be 
authoritatively  declared  by  those  commissioned  for  that 
purpose :  "  For  in  him,"  says  one  of  these  authorized 
preachers,  "  all  the  promises  of  God  are  yea,  and  in  him 
amen  ;"t  in  him  they  are  all  made  sure  to  us,  and  by  him 
are  truly  and  effectually  accomplished. 

But  "  remission  of  sins"  is  not  of  itself  sufficient  to  fill 
up  the  measure  of  divine  mercy  promised  to  man  in  his 
blessed  Redeemer,  and  which  the  light  of  nature  could 
never  have  exhibited  to  the  eye  of  faith :  "  there  is  still," 
as  an  eminent  writer  beautifully  expresses  it,  "  something 
farther  that  nature  craves,  something  which  with  unuttera- 
ble groans  she  pants  after,  even  life  and  happiness  for  ever- 
more. She  sees  all  her  children  go  down  to  the  grave; 
and  all  beyond  the  grave  is  to  her  one  wide  waste,  a  land 
of  doubt  and  uncertainty :  when  she  looks  into  it,  she  has 
her  hopes,  and  she  has  her  fears ;  and  agitated  by  the  vicis- 
situde of  these  passions,  she  finds  no  ground  whereon  to  rest 
her  foot.  How  different  is  the  scene  which  the  gospel 
opens!  there  we  see  the  heavenly  Canaan,  the  new  Jerusa- 
lem; in  which  city  of  the  great  God,  there  are  mansions, 
many  mansions  for  receiving  them,  who  through  faith,  and 
patient  continuance  in  well-doing,  seek  for  glorv  and  im- 
mortality."J  How  properh',  then,  may  we  join  in  the 
words  which  an  apostle  addressed  to  his  Saviour,  "  Lord, 
to  whom  shall  we  go?  Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal 
life."||  Thou  hast  exhibited  in  thine  own  person  a  clear 
Tandeniable  proof,  that  "  life   and  immortality  are   now 

*  St.  Luke  xxiv.  46,  47. 

t  2  Cor.  i.  20. 

I  See  Bishop  Sherlock's  Discourse  on  St.  Johniii.  Ifi, 

y  St.  John  vi.  68. 

9 


6i&  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated* 

brought  to  light,"  and  therefore  need  not  be  sought  in  the 
dark  uncertain  guesses  of  human  reason,  which  may  serve 
well  enough  in  the  affairs  of  this  life,  and  in  pointing  out 
some  of  the  common  duties  between  man  and  man ;  but 
when  it  exceeds  its  bounds,  and  presumes  to  meddle  with 
the  deep  things  of  God,  and  to  dictate  in  the  great  points 
of  religion,  its  weakness  and  insufficiency  do  then  mani- 
festly appear.  It  is  but  "  the  bUnd  leading  the  blind,"  and 
will  sooner  betray  us  into  error  and  danger,  than  deliver  us 
out  of  them.  Shall  we  then  quit  the  glorious  light  dis- 
played in  the  gospel  of  Christ,  to  follow  the  faint  and  feeble 
gUmmering  of  natural  reason  I  Shall  we  seek  for  clearness 
in  the  midst  of  obscurity,  or  hope  to  meet  with  truth  in 
the  labyrinths  of  error  and  uncertainty?  Thou  blessed 
Saviour  of  the  world!  If  we  leave  thee,  to  whom  shall  we 
go?  Where  shall  we  find  a  guide  like  thee,  a  conductor  so 
kind,  so  compassionate,  so  infinitely  wise,  so  divinely  mer- 
eiful  ?  "  Thou  light  of  the  Gentiles  and  glory  of  Israel  1" 
How  great  must  be  the  blindness  and  infatuation  of  those 
who,  refusing  to  be  guided  by  the  radiant  beams  of  thy 
heavenly  doctrine,  walk  on  in  the  false  and  treacherous 
ways  of  their  own  devising,  and  neither  discern,  nor  desire 
to  know  the  truth  ?  What  egregious  folly,  as  well  as  base 
ingratitude  is  it,  thus  to  spurn  at  all  the  gracious  designs  of 
heaven,  and  seek  to  fall  back  into  the  miserable  gulfs  of 
heathen  ignorance  and  idolatry;  there  to  lie  lost  and  bewil- 
dered by  the  light  of  that  reason  which  we  have  now  been 
viewing,  as  set  up  through  all  its  weakness  and  wanderings, 
in  opposition  to  divine  revelation  ! 

Reason,  we  acknowledge,  is  the  gift  of  God  to  man;^ 
and  had  it  always  been  employed,  as  it  ought  to  have  been, 
in  the  service,  and  for  the  honour  of  the  Giver,  it  would 
have  proved  what  it  was  designed  to  be,  an  able  advocate 

•  See  Mr.  Daubeny's  excellent  reasoning  on  this  subject,  in  the  first 
discourse  of  his  work  above  mentioned,  ' 


Frimitlve  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  67 

for  the  truth  of  revealed  religion  ;  which,  it  is  evident  from 
that  common  mark  of  distinction,  could  not  have  been 
known,  till  it  was  revealed  or  discovered  by  its  gracious 
Author.^ — Yet  human  reason  would  be  muttering  against 
this  divine  truth,  and  holding  up  some  semblance  of  reli- 
gion as  natural  to  man,  which,  therefore,  it  was  not  requi- 
site for  God  to  reveal ;  the  discovery  of  which  we  shall 
allow  to  be  a  natural  enough  consequence  of  the  pride  and 
vanity  of  the  human  heart. — But  the  misfortune  is,  that 
this  specious  theory  happens  to  be  directly  contrary  to  mat- 
ter of  fact :  For  if  there  be  any  truth  in  revelation,  which 
those  who  talk  so  much  of  the  connection  between  natural 
and  revealed  religion  seem  to  acknowledge ;  nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  God  spake,  or  revealed  his  will  to 
Adam  in  Paradise,  and  that  too,  as  soon  as  he  was  created; 
a  circumstance  which  cuts  off  all  right  of  precedence  in  any 
other  mode  of  discovery,  and  leaves  no  room  for  that  ima- 
ginary system  of  human  invention— -the  religion  of  nature. 
Yet  no  sooner  had  revelation  thus  commenced  in  Paradise, 
than  we  are  immediately  informed  of  that  ambitious  desire 
of  obtaining  knowledge  by  other  means,  which  proved  so 
fatal  to  our  first  parents.  "  Ye  shall  be  as  Gods,  knowing 
good  and  evil,"  was  the  temptation  which  took  hold  of 
the  human  understanding  upon  its  first  perversion  ;  and  the 
success  which  the  tempter  gained  on  that  occasion,  has  en- 
couraged him  to  go  on  with  a  continued  repetition  of  that 
same  confident  assurance  ;  which,  by  setting  up  the  reason 
of  man  in  opposition  to  the  word  of  his  Maker,  laid  the 
foundation  for  infidelity,  in  all  that  variety  of  forms  in 
which  it  has  since  appeared,  through  the  several  ages  and 
nations  of  the  world. 

The  whole  train  of  opinions  that  attend  what  is  com- 


*  It  has  been  well  observed,  that  right  reason,  as  expressed  in  Latin 
by  Ratio  recta,  must  mean  reason  ruled,  or  directed  by  a  law,  that  is, 
by  the  law  or  will  of  God. 


ea  Primiitve  Truth  and  Or defvindiccite^* 

monly  called  Freethinkihg^  will  be  found  to  flow  from 
some  unworthy  notion,  or  settled  contempt  of  divine 
revelation,  grounded  on  this  false  principle,  that  man's  own 
understanding  must  be  a  sufficient  guide  to  him  in  all 
matters  of  religious  concern.-— According  to  this  assump- 
tion of  the  Freethinkers,  as  the  human  mind  is  capable  of 
advancing  by  progressive  information,  to  higher  degrees  of 
knowledge,  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  our  carrying  on  the 
improvement  of  religion  by  the  same  means,  till  it  be 
brought  to  its  utmost  degree  of  perfection.  This  is  placing 
religion  on  the  same  footing  with  those  arts  and  sciences, 
the  study  of  which  opens  a  wide  field  for  speculation,  and 
is  daily  leading  to  new  discoveries,  calculated  to  improve 
the  condition  of  man  in  this  world,  and  produced  by  the 
exertion  of  those  natural  faculties  with  which  God  was 
pleased  to  furnish  him.  But  religion  has  a  different  object 
in  view,  and  points  the  attention  of  man  to  matters  of  in- 
finitely greater  importance.  It  invites  him  to  look  forward 
to  a  future  state  of  existence,  and  provides  the  means  by 
which  he  may  be  prepared  for  the  enjoyment  of  ever- 
lasting happiness.  The  knowledge  and  application  of  these 
means,  accompanied  with  a  firm  belief  of  the  end  to  which 
they  lead,  make  up  the  great  business  of  religion  ;  which, 
it  is  evident,  man  was  wholly  unable  to  carry  on  by  him- 
self, without  immediate  instruction  and  assistance  from  his 
Maker. — This  necessary  aid  was  afforded,  as  soon  as  he 
was  created  ;  and  has  been  continued  in  various  ways,  as 
circumstances  required,  but  with  a  constant  attention  to 
the  accomplishment  of  that  gracious  object  which  the  Deity 
had  in  view,  by  communicating  the  knowledge  of  his  will 
to  man.  Every  such  communication  tended  more  and 
more  to  comfirm  his  dependance  on  God's  everlasting  pur- 
pose; and  that  scheme  of  mercy,  which  had  been  projected 
in  the  councils  of  heaven,  and  partially  revealed  from  time 
to  time,  was  thus  seen  advancing  through  all  its  successive 
stages,  till  it  arrived  at  that  fulness  of  tim^,  which  had 


Frimitlve  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  69 

been  appointed  for  its  complete  manifestation  in  the  per- 
sonal ministry  of  God's  incarnate  Son. 

Such  has  been  the  uniform  purpose,  and  continued 
progress  of  divine  revelation,  from  its  commencement  in 
Paradise,  to  its  final  termination  in  the  gospel  of  Christ. 
Nothing  then  can  be  more  certain  than  this  obvious  conse- 
quence, that  religion  thus  coming  from  God,  and  founded 
on  the  clear  revelation  of  his  will  to  man,  must  be  consi- 
dered in  itself  as  a  perfect  institution,  and  incapable  of 
receiving  any  improvement  from  the  utmost  efforts  of 
human  intellect.  Men  may  talk  as  they  please,  of  the  pro- 
gress of  arts  and  sciences  ;  these,  as  human  inventions, 
will  always  be  susceptible  of  some  degree  of  improvement, 
in  proportion  to  the  weakness,  and  want  of  skill  displayed 
by  their  several  authors  :  But  nothing  can  be  more  absurd, 
than  to  speak  of  a  progressive  religion ;  which,  as  the  work 
of  God,  can  never  receive  any  additional  excellence  from 
the  wit  or  contrivance  of  men.  If  it  has  been  abused  and 
perverted  by  human  folly,  a  just  regard  to  its  original  insti- 
tution requires  that  it  should  be  rescued  from  these  abuses, 
and  brought  back  to  its  primitive  standard.  But  every 
attempt  at  such  necessary  reformation  ought  to  have  its 
object  distinctly  ascertained,  and  be  directed  to  the  proper 
measures  for  obtaining  the  removal  of  those  corruptions, 
which  have  given  rise  to  it.  Without  some  such  direction 
to  a  specific  point,  and  a  well  regulated  adherence  to  fun- 
damental truths,  a  boundless  field  of  speculation  will  be 
laid  open,  and  one  theorv  will  follow  another  in  such  end- 
less succession,  as  to  leave  those  who  are  thus  seduced 
from  the  right  way,  in  the  perilous  condition  described  by 
the  apostle,  *'  ever  learning,  and  never  able  to  come  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth."* 

''  The  conceit  of  superior  learning,"   says  a  venerable 
author,  "  has  always  had  an  ill  effect  upon  Christianity, 

*  2  Tim.  iii.  7. 


70  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

and  is  frequently  found  in  those  who  have  no  great  matters 
to  value  themselves  upon.  We  may  be  as  learned  as  we 
can  make  ourselves,  and  yet  continue  good  Christians ;  be- 
cause true  learning,  and  true  religion,  were  never  yet  at 
variance  ;  but  the  moment  we  are  vain  of  our  learning,  we 
begin  to  be  in  danger,  and  some  folly  or  other  is  not  far 
off."*  So  careful  was  the  author  of  this  pious  observation 
to  guard  us  against  that  vain  pretension  to  learning,  which 
makes  some  men  affect  to  be  wise  in  matters  of  religion, 
"  above  what  is  written ;"  while,  at  the  same  time,  he  was 
equally  careful  to  withhold  every  encouragement  from  that 
enthusiastic  notion,  so  fondly  cherished  by  others  of  a  dif- 
ferent description,  who  imagine  themselves  sure  of  salvation, 
for  no  other  reason,  but  because  they  are  ignorant  and 
unlearned.  Both  these  extremes  must  be  equally  avoided ; 
and  there  cannot  be  much  difficulty  in  drawing  the  line 
between  that  proud  display  of  learning,  which  looks  down 
with  contempt  on  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel,  and  the  no 
less  presumptuous  ignorance,  which  foolishly  regards  all 
its  inward  feelings  and  imaginaiy  assurance,  as  certain 
proofs  of  a  saving  faith,  though  unaccompanied  with  any 
true  knowledge  of  the  ground  on  which  that  faith  is  built.^ 


*  And  none  more  near  at  hand,  than  what  the  same  author  had  been 
just  before  describing.  For  "  how  often,"  sa}  s  he,  "  has  it  been  urged, 
that  we  ought  not  to  receive  the  faith,  which  the  first  fathers  of  the 
church,  and  the  succeeding  fathers  of  the  reformation,  have  delivered 
to  us,  because  we  are  of  late  years  so  far  advanced  above  them  in  know- 
ledge ?  But  I  have  never  seen  the  connection  pointed  out  between  any- 
modern  improvement  in  science,  and  the  new  doctrines  of  reformers  in 
theology.  We  are  certainly  much  improved,  for  instance,  in  the  art  of 
making  time-keepers,  above  those  who  lived  an  hundred  years  ago ;  but 
no  man  will  say,  that  we  thence  derive  any  advantage  for  numbering 
our  days  more  wisely,  or  that  we  have  any  clearer  ideas  of  eternity,  than 
we  had  before.  An  eminent  artist  in  this  way  may  doubt  of  the  Apos- 
tles' Creed ;  but  then,  there  is  no  visible  relation  betv/een  his  art,  and 
his  unbelief."  See  Bishop  Hume's  Charge  to  the  Clergy  of  the  Diocese 
of  Norwich,  ir92. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  71 

Being  thus  convinced,  that  there  is  no  necessary  connec- 
tion between  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  and  the  disco^ 
veries  which  from  time  to  time  have  been  made  in  various 
branches  of  science,  and  therefore  no  wisdom  or  safety  in 
attempting  to  place  subjects  under  the  same  point  of  view, 
which  are  as  widely  separated  from  each  other,  as  earth 
from  heaven ;  we  cannot  but  readily  embrace  this  unavoid- 
able consequence,  and  cherish  it  as  a  most  valuable  and  im- 
portant truth,  that  the  religion  of  Christ  is  not  a  thing  to  be 
new-modelled  and  improved,  in  hopes  of  bringing  it  to  a 
greater  degree  of  perfection.  It  cannot  put  on  those  va- 
rious modes  and  shapes,  which  are  suited  to  the  fashions 
and  fancies  of  the  times,  but  must  always  be  expected  to 
appear  in  an  uniform  dress,  and  to  wear  the  character  of 
its  divine  Author,  that  of  being  "  the  same  yesterday,  to- 
day, and  for  ever."  Because  his  aposdes,  and  their  suc- 
cessors, have  been  called  ministers  of  the  Nerv  Testament, 
we  are  not  to  suppose  that  their  ministry  consists  in  alwa5^s 
delivering  something  that  is  nenv^  or  different  from  what 
has  been  said  before;  since  the  faith  for  which  we  are 
exhorted  "  earnestly  to  contend,  was  but  once  delivered  to 
the  saints,"  and  therefore  what  was  the  whole  faith  then, 
must  continue  to  be  so  still ;  nothing  must  be  added  to  it, 
or  taken  from  it.  Perhaps  there  never  was  a  time  which 
required  so  much  steady  attention  to  this  matter  as  the 
present ;  when  an  itch  for  noyelty  seems  to  prevail,  beyond 
any  thing  of  the  kind  that  has  been  hitherto  observed. 
Every  age,  no  doubt,  has  had  that  common  failing  of  ima- 
gining itself  to  be  wiser  than  any  that  preceded  it.  But 
the  wisdom  of  this  age  pretends  to  carry  the  point  much 
farther  than  ever  was  attempted  before  ;  and  nothing  more 
is  necessary  now  to  set  aside  the  most  venerable  truths,  and 
institutions  of  religion,  than  merly  to  say,  that  they  are  old 
and  obsolete,  and  founded  on  such  antiquated  notions,  as 
are  totally  inconsistent  with  that  more  just  and  liberal  view 
ef  things,  which  is  the  pride  of  this  enlightened  age.   Thus 


72  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

are  mankind  led  away  by  the  mere  force  of  fashion,  and 
bullied  out  of  their  religion,  out  of  every  thing  that  is  va- 
luable and  good,  by  a  few  bold  unmeaning  words,  which 
serve  only  to  show  the  folly  and  confidence  of  those  that 
use  them.  Such  persons,  we  may  observe,  are  ever  on 
the  wing  of  speculation,  devising  new  theories  both  of  sa-r 
cred  and  civil  government;  and  when  any  disagreeable 
truth  stands  in  their  way,  they  have  only  to  hold  it  up,  as 
an  exploded  doctrine, — a  remnant  of  that  hateful  thing  cal- 
led Priestcraft ;  which  immediately  does  the  business,  and 
saves  the  trouble  of  any  farther  reasoning  on  the  subject. 

These  are  the  errors  and  delusions  with  which  all  sound 
and  sincere  Christians  have  to  contend,  and  to  carry  on  the 
contest  in  that  earnest  manner,  which  an  Apostle  so  warmly 
recommends  ;^  a  contest,  which  it  was  never  more  neces- 
sary than  at  present,  to  urge  with  fervour,  and  prosecute 
with  zeal  and  firmness — a  zeal  proportionate  to  the  danger 
to  which  the  true  faith  of  Christ  is  now  exposed,  both  from 
the  bold  attempts  of  avowed  enemies,  and  the  insidious  aid 
of  pretended  friends,  appearing  outwardly  to  support,  but 
secretly  undermining  the  foundation  of  that  authority,  on 
which  rests  our  belief  of  the  Christian  doctrine.  In  defence 
of  that  doctrine,  the  credibility  of  which  is  so  openly  at- 
tacked by  infidelity  on  the  one  hand,  and  its  purity  no  less 
endangered  by  enthusiasm  on  the  other,  we  must  there- 
fore strive  to  arm  ourselves  with  such  weapons  as  are  best 
calculated  for  repelling  the  assault  made  on  it,  and  the  in- 
jury done  to  it,  by  each  of  these  powerful,  but,  we  trust, 
not  invincible  adversaries.  From  the  manner  in  which  the 
aposde  exhorts  us  to  pursue  this  arduous  contest,  it  is  evi- 
dent, that  by  the  faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints,  we 
are  to  understand,  not  an  inward  conviction  of  the  truth  of 
the  Christian  doctrine,  or  that  assurance  of  faith,  which 
some  modem  preachers  boast  of,  as  the  peculiar  privilego 

*  Sr  Jude.  P.. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  'vindicated,  73 

of  their  saints,  but  something  that  could  be  delivered  in  an 
outward  and  public  manner,  could  be  read,  or  heard  like 
the  ^'•form  of  sound  words'^  mentioned  by  St.  Paul,  which 
Timothy  was  directed  to  "  hold  fast  ^^  that  so  he  might 
hand  it  down  to  the  Christian  church,  as  a  model  of  what 
was  to  be  professed  and  believed  in  that  church,  to  the  end 
of  the  world.    Accordingly  it  is  by  such  a  summary  of  the 
Christian  faith  that  the  church  to  which  we  belong  con- 
tinues, and,  I  trust,  will  continue,  to  profess  her  belief  in 
the  adorable  Three  who  subsist,  with  equal  power,  ma- 
jesty and  etemit^^,  in  the  unity  of  the  Godhead,  and  bear 
record  in  heaven  to  the  merciful  scheme  of  man's  salva- 
tion.    By  such  a  concise  and  well-composedy£?rw  of  sound 
words,  we  are  taught  to  ascribe  our  creation  to  "  the  Father 
Almighty^"  our  redemption  to  "  his  only  Son  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord,"  and  our  sanctification  to  "  the  Holy  Ghost ;" 
adding  also  our  faith  in  ''  one  holy,  catholic  church,"  that 
mystical  body,  of  which  Christ  is  the  glorious  Head,  and 
in  which  is  enjoyed  "  the  communion  of  saints,"  blessed 
with  the  promise  of  "  forgiveness  of  sins"  in  this  world, 
and  of  the  "  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and  everlasting 
life"  in  the  world  to  come.    This  is  undoubtedly  the  faith 
which  Christ  established   in  his   church,  and  which  he 
authorized  his  apostles  to  deliver  from  him,  as  a  sacred 
privilege  or  blessing  to  his  people,  to  be  received  and  pre- 
served as  such,  whole  and  entire,  till  he  should  come  again 
to  give  a  "  crown  of  righteousness,"  to  all  them  who  shall 
thus  "  have  kept  the  faith,  and  love  his  appearing." 

For  the  preservation,  therefore,  of  such  a  blessing,  the 
sum  and  substance  of  all  the  good  things  which  Christ  has 
made  over  to  his  church,  and  in  the  hope  of  that  glorious 
reward  which  he  has  promised  to  such  fidelity,  it  is  surely 
the  interest,  as  much  as  the  duty  of  all  Christians,  to  con- 
tend in  the  most  earnest  manner ;  and  they  cannot  do  so 

*  2Tim.  i.  lo. 
10 


['!t4f  Primiitve  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

more  effectually,  than  by  holding  out  the  end  and  object  of 
their  faith  in  t)ie  same  uniform  light,  in  which  it  has  ever 
been. represented,   as  the  effect  of  that  divine  immutable 
counsel,  which  admits  of  no  change  or  variation,  and  so 
makes  the  volume  of  revelation  speak  a  clear,  consistent 
language  from  beginning  to  end.     It  begins  with  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world,  and  the  formation  of  man ;  and  it  ends 
with  the  last  judgment,  and  consummation  of  all  things ; 
and  through  the  whole  period  described  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, we  see  a  regular  chain  and  series  of  well-connected 
events,  all  leading  on  to  tlie  incarnation  of  the  promised 
Redeemer,   and  directing  the  attention  of  God's  faithful 
people  to  that  great  m}  stery  of  godliness,  God  manifested 
in  the  flesh.     It  was  to  this  mysterious  accomplishment  of 
the  Divine  counsel,  that  the  law  and  the  prophets  looked 
forward ;   and  what  was  so  long  shadowed  out  in  their 
t}T)ical  rites,  and  figurative  language,  was  at  last  most  hap- 
pily exhibited  in  all  its  substance,  under  the  dispensation  of 
the  gospel ;  which  is,  therefore,  to  be  considered  as  fulfil- 
ling the  law,  just  as  the  law  was  predicting  the  gospel,  and 
both  are  to  be  viewed  as  constituting  one  beautiful  and  con- 
•  sistent  scheme  of  salvation. 

It  is  by  adhering  to  this  unity  of  design,  and  placing 
things  in  their  proper  form  and  order,  that  the  faith  of  a 
Christian  is  built  on  such  a  firm  and  solid  foundation,  as 
man  cannot  lay ;  but  which  was  graciously  laid  for  him  in 
the  will  and  counsel  of  his  God  before  the  world  began,  and 
gradually  manifested  in  all  the  outlines  of  the  marvellous 
plan,  according  to  the  wisdom  of  its  Almighty  contriver. 
When  things  are  thus  traced  back  to  their  proper  source, 
we  can  easily  perceive  the  instructive  design  of  those  sa- 
cred emblems,  under  which  the  knowledge  of  God's  mer- 
ciful purpose,  and  good  will  towards  men,  is  so  beautifully 
conveyed  to  us  :  And  it  is  in  this  view  that  we  are  taught 
to  behold  the  ancient  patriarchs,  prophets,  priests  and  kings, 
as  typiciil  characters,  and  their  several  offices,  and  the  more 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  7if 

retnarkable  passages  of  their  lives,  as  fore-showing  him, 
who  was  to  arise,  as  the  Head  of  the  holv  family,  the  great 
Prophet,  the  true  Priest,  the  everlasting  King.*  Thus  the 
events  which  happened  to  the  ancient  people  of  God,  were 
designed  to  point  out,  as  in  a  figure,  parallel  occurrences, 
which  should  afterwards  take  place  in  the  accomplishment 
of  man's  redemption,  and  the  rise  and  progress  of  the 
Christian  church  :  and  as  we  are  to  view  in  the  same  light 
the  various  provocations  and  punishments,  captivities  and 
restorations  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  which  we  are  assured 
"  happened  unto  them  for  ensamples,"  "  types  or  figures," 
and  were  written  for  our  admonition  ;  so  we  are  to  under- 
stand in  the  sam.e  figurative  sense,  what  is  said  of  the  law, 
and  its  ceremonies  ;  of  the  tabernacle  and  temple,  with  the 
services  therein  performed,  and  of  the  whole  economy  of 
the  priesthood  of  Aaron.  All  this  the  well-instructed 
Christian  will  easily  transfer  to  the  new  law  of  the  gospel, 
to  the  oblation  of  Christ,  to  the  true  tabernacle  or  temple 
not  made  with  hands,  and  to  what  was  done  therein  for  the 
salvation  of  the  world,  by  him,  who  was  in  one  respect  a 
sacrifice,  in  another  a  temple,  and  in  a  third  a  "  High  Priest 
for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek  ;"  after  a  certain 
order,  form,  or  regulation,  which  was  to  be  the  rule  and 
model  of  the  Christian  priesthood  for  ever. 

That  the  Christian  church  was  to  have  a  priesthood,  duly 
and  regularly  ordered,  according  to  a  form  appointed  for 


*  See  this  subject  admirably  illustrated  In  the  preface  to  Bishop  Horne's 
excellent  Commentary  on  the  Book  of  Psalms,  which  his  biographer  justly 
calls  the  greatest  work  of  his  life,  and  of  which  the  author  himself  gave 
this  account,  soon  after  it  was  begun  :  "  The  work  delights  me  greatly, 
and  seems,  so  far  as  I  can  judge  of  my  own  turn  and  talents,  to  suit  me 
the  best  of  any  I  can  think  of.  May  he  who  hath  the  Key  of  Bavid, 
prosper  it  in  my  hand,  granting  me  the  knowledge  and  utterance  neces- 
liary  to  make  it  serviceable  to  the  church  !"  Let  any  person  of  judgment 
peruse  the  work,  and  he  will  see  how  well  the  author  has  succeeded,  and 
kept  lip  the  spirit  of  it  to  the  end, 


^W  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated^ 

that  purpose,  is  abundantly  evident  from  the  whole  of  St. 
PauFs  reasoning  on  this  subject,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  He* 
brews ;  in  which  the  figurative  economy  of  the  law  is  repre- 
•ented  as  brought  to  perfection  under  the  gospel,  and  the 
service  of  the  temple  as  furnishing  a  t}^pical  resemblance  of 
that  of  the  Christian  church.  If  the  faithful  Jews  were 
allowed  to  draw  near  to  God,  through  the  appointed  minis- 
trations of  the  tabernacle  j  "  we  have  any  altar,"  says  the 
apostle,  "  from  which  they  had  no  right  to  eat,  while  they 
still  adhered  to  that  unavailing  service:"  And  if  as  Chris- 
tians, we  have  an  altar ^  we  must  also  have  a  priesthood  to 
minister  at  the  altar  ;  for  these  are  correlative  terms  ;  and 
St.  Paul  certainly  considered  them  as  such,  when  he  was  at 
so  much  pains  to  point  out  the  analogy  in  this  respect 
between  the  law  and  the  gospel,  and  laid  it  dov/n  as  a  set- 
tled rule,  that  "  no  man  ever  taketh  this  honour"  (of  the 
priesthood)  "  unto  himself,"  or  can  ever  receive  it,  but 
from  the  hands  of  those  who  have  power  to  give  it,  "  those 
that  are  called  of  God  as  was  Aaron."  I'he  apostle,  it  is 
evident,  meant  to  show,  that  the  Christian  and  Jewish 
churches  were  not  two  different  dispensations,  as  to  their 
original  plan  and  purpose,  but  a  continuation  of  the  one 
church  of  God,  and  one  Divine  economy  for  the  salvation 
of  man:  And  things  were  thus  regularly  ordained  and  uni- 
formly carried  on,  because  it  is  of  infinite  importance  to 
man,  that  he  should  always  be  able  to  know,  if  he  will  but 
diligently  inquire,  where,  and  with  whom  he  is  to  find  the 
commission,  which  has  been  faithfully  handed  down  to  those 
who  are  appointed  to  minister  in  holy  things.^    If  ever 


*  See  this  matter,  and  others  of  similar  importance,  recommended  tc» 
i)ie  attention  which  they  justly  deserve,  in  a  small  traet,  lately  pub- 
lished, called  a  "  Layman's  Account  of  bis  Faith  and  Practice^  as  a  Mem- 
ber of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Scotland"  and  of  which  the  British  Critic, 
for  December,  1801,  says — "  The  principles  which  the  author  labours 
to  establish,  are  certainly  sound,  his  reasoning  is  cogent  without  pubtiet)', 
liud  his  piery  serious  %v;!hoa';  moroscncss." 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated*  77 

such  an  appointment  took  place,  and  we  are  well  assured 
it  did  take  place  by  Divine  authority,  it  must  certainly  be 
continued,  and  carried  on,  to  answer  the  end  designed  by 
it:  And  how  can  it  possibly  be  continued  in  a  right  and 
regular  manner,  but  by  keeping  it  within  the  lines  marked 
out  for  its  preservation,  and  in  the  proper  channel,  through 
which  it  may  pass  on  to  future  ages ;  just  "  as  a  river, 
whilst  confined  within  its  banks,  flows  on  full  and  far  in  its 
destined  course  j  but  if  its  mounds  are  broken  down,  and 
its  waters  scattered  and  diffused  beyond  their  natural  limits, 
it  ceases  to  be  a  river,  it  loses  its  force,  its  beauty  and  use- 
fulness, and  becomes  unable  to  reach  the  distant  ocean,  to 
which  its  course  was  directed."*  Such  must  have  been 
the  case  with  the  Christian  ministry,  had  no  limitation  been 
prescribed,  no  exclusive  rights  assigned  to  it,  and  no  pro- 
vision made  for  transmitting  these  from  the  fountain-head, 
through  streams  of  regular  succession,  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  But  as  all  this  has  been  happily  attended  to,  by  the 
wisdom  of  our  blessed  Redeemer,  it  follows  of  course,  that 
this  part  of  the  gracious  scheme  of  redemption  must  be 
strictly  adhered  to  by  us  ;  no  attempt  must  be  made  to 
*'  add  to,  or  diminish  from  it."  The  means  of  grace,  the 
channels  of  communication,  through  which  the  benefits  of 
the  gospel  are  conveyed  to  those  who  are  called  to  partake 
of  them,  must  be  preserved  whole  and  entire,  without  any 
breach  or  interruption,  as  the  current  of  revelation  itself; 
Otherwise,  the  people  of  God  may  be  accused  now,  as  they 
were  formerly,  of  "  committing  two  evils — forsaking  the 
fountain  of  living  waters,  and  hewing  out  to  themselves 
cisterns,  broken  cisterns  that  can  hold  no  water.^f  In  our 
Lord's  conversation  with  the  woman  of  Samaria  at  Jacob's 
well,  the  same  figurative  language  is  made  use  of,  to  show 

*  See  a  Sermon ,  entitled,  "  A  due  Ordination  as  necessary  as  a  due 
Call  to  the  Gospel  Priesthood."  By  the  Rev.  C.  C.  Church,  rector  of 
Gosforth,  and  minister  of  Trinity,  Whitehaven. 

i  Jer.  ii.  13. 


Y8  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  hindkated. 

that  Christ  being  the  only  fountain  of  "  living  waters,"* 
there  is  no  other  way  of  partaking  of  this  life-giving  spring, 
but  by  the  means  which  he  has  appointed  for  imparting  to 
us  its  salutary  virtue  :  and  for  preserving  it  pure  and  entire, 
having  hewn  us  out  a  cistern,  even  his  church  upon  earth, 
he  is  said  to  have  given  "  this  treasure  in  earthen  vessels^ 
that  the  excellency  of  the  power  may  be  of  God,  and  not 
of  us."t  I^  conformity  to  which,  he  tells  Ananias  con- 
cerning the  appointment  of  St.  Paul  to  the  ministry—"  Go 
thy  way,  for  he  is  a  chosen  vessel  unto  me,  to  bear  my  name 
before  the  Gentiles,  and  kings,  and  the  children  of  Israel  ;"f 
just  as  the  same  Lord  had  shown  the  necessity  of  his  mak- 
ing a  similar  choice  for  the  same  purpose,  when  he  thus 
addressed  his  apostles :  "  Ye  have  not  chosen  me,  but  I 
have  chosen  you,  and  ordained  you,  that  you  should  gOy 
and  bring  forth  fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  remainJ'''^ 
But  the  fruit  or  effect  of  their  apostolic  commission  could 
not  have  long  remained^  far  less  could  that  commission 
have  extended  "  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  if  it  had 
not  been  understood  and  exercised  by  them  to  this  effect, 
that  as  they  themselves  were  chosen  and  sent^  so  were  they 
.appointed  to  choose  and  send  oihtrs^  with  the  same  ordinary 
powers  which  they  had  received,  for  carrying  on  the  work 
of  the  ministry,  and  the  continued  edifying  of  the  body  of 
Christ. 

It  would  be  deemed  a  ver}^  bold  and  desperate  attempt 
to  think  of  altering  the  circulation  of  the  blood  through  the 
human  body,  and  turning  it  into  new  channels:  Yet  even 
this  hopeless  undertaking  could  not  exceed  that  height  of 
folly  and  presumption,  which  would  propose  to  divert  the- 
progress  of  divine  grace  from  the  channels  appointed  for 
conveying  it  through  the  mystical  body  of  Christ ;  or  give 
it  a  course  different  from  that,  which  the  God  of  all  grace 


*  St.  John  iv.  10—14.  \  Acts  ix.  15. 

t  2  Cor.  iv.  7.  %  St.  John  xv.  16. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  79 

has  ordained  for  it.  In  all  societies,  even  in  those  which 
have  only  the  affairs  of  this  world  for  their  object,  we  find 
that  certain  regulations  must  be  adopted  for  preserving 
peace  and  order,  and  securing  to  the  several  members  the 
enjoyment  of  their  peculiar  rights  and  privileges,  with  all 
the  benefits  and  advantages  that  are  connected  with  the 
purpose  for  which  the  society  has  been  formed,  and  which 
are  expected  to  arise  from  it.  Such  is  the  case  in  all  those 
bodies  politic,  or  temporal  societies,  which,  for  the  conve- 
nience of  those  concerned  in  them,  are  established  on  just 
principles,  and  supported  by  the  lawful  eflfoits  of  human 
industry.  And  such,  we  find,  has  ahvays  been  the  case, 
with  respect  to  that  ecclesiastical  body,  or  spiritual  society, 
instituted  by  divine  wisdom,  for  the  merciful  purpose  of 
communicating  to  those  who  are  received  into  it,  the  means 
of  grace  here,  and  the  hopes  of  glory  hereafter.  From 
the  manner  in  which  it  embraces  these  two  grand  and  im- 
portant objects,  it  is  evident  that  the  economy  of  this  spi^ 
ritual  society  must  have  a  two-fold  applicati  n,  and  be 
considered  as  partly  concenied  with  the  outward,  partly 
with  the  inward  man. 

The  human  frame,  we  knov/,  consists  of  two  parts,  a 
body  and  a  soul;  and  hence  it  is,  that  an  inspired  apostle 
draws  a  most  beautiful  allusion,  representing  the  unity  of 
the  church  of  Christ,  as  being  one  body,  animated  and  in- 
fluenced by  one  spirit.  But  if  the  church  be  designed  to 
comprehend  the  whole  man,  and  to  hold  out  the  means  of 
sanctifying  and  saving  both  soul  and  body,  and  preserving 
both  unto  everlasting  life;  to  answer  this  gracious  purpose, 
it  must  be  so  constituted  as  to  exhibit  outward  and  visible 
signs  suited  to  the  sensations  of  the  body,  and  convey  an 
inward  and  spiritual  grace  adapted  to  the  necessities  of  the 
soul. — The  institutions  appointed  for  that  purpose,  are, 
therefore,  very  properly  called  Mysteries^  as  exhibiting 
one  thing  to  the  outward  senses,  and  by  that  sacramental 
emblem,  disclosing  another  thing  spiritually  to  the  mind. 


to  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated* 

They  are  the  mysterious  means,  which  God  has  ordained, 
under  the  economy  of  the  gospel,  for  communicating  sal- 
vation and  life  to  man :  And  for  that  reason,  when  St.  Paul 
wished  to  point  out  the  natin-e  of  his  ministry,  as  "  serving 
God  in  that  gospel,"  and  the  regard  which  was  due  to  his 
sacred  office,  he  did  it  in  these  terms,-—''  Let  a  man  so 
account  of  us,  as  ministers  of  Christ,  and  stewards  of  the 
mysteries  of  God  ;"*  thereby  plainly  showing,  that  none 
but  the  "  ministers  of  Christ,"  persons  set  apart  for  the 
service  of  the  church  in  the  way  of  his  appointment,  have 
a  right  to  be  considered  as  "  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of 
God,"  duly  authorized  to  dispense  that  spiritual  food  and 
nourishment,  which  the  heavenly  Householder  has  so  gra- 
ciously provided  for  the  support  and  comfort  of  his  happy 
family. 

It  was,  no  doubt,  in  allusion  to  this  merciful  provision, 
that  we  find  our  Lord  asking — "  Who  then  is  that  faithful 
and  wise  steward,  whom  his  Lord  shall  make  ruler  over  his 
household,  to  give  them  their  portion  of  meat  in  due  sea- 
son ?"t  By  the  household  here,  we  are  certainly  to  un- 
derstand the  church  of  Christ,  which  is  often  distinguished 
as  *'  the  household  of  faith — the  house,  or  household  of 
God :"  And  as  Christ  is  by  office,  and  in  a  peculiar  man- 
ner, the  Lord  of  this  household,  so  the  rulers  of  it  are  those 
officers  who  act  under  him,  as  the  governors  and  pastors  of 
his  church,  and  who,  it  seems,  must  be  made  such  by  him, 
that  is,  made  "  ministers  of  Christ," — as  he  has  directed, 
before  the)'^  can  become  "  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of 
God."  This,  we  know,  is  the  case  in  all  well-regulated 
households.  Those  who  act  as  stewards  are  appointed, 
not  by  the  family,  but  by  the  Lord  or  Master  of  the  famil}', 
and  are  accountable,  not  to  them,  but  to  him,  for  giving 
them  their  meat  in  due  season.  The  meat  Vvliich  the 
church  is  to  receive  from  its  rulers  and  stewards,  is  the 

"  ICor.  iv.  1.  t  St.  Luke  xii.  42. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated*  H% 

word  of  life,  or  the  means  of  grace  and  salvation,  which 
are  called  "  God's  mysteries;"  being  that  mystical  provi* 
slon  which  he  has  laid  up  in  store,  to  be  regularly  dealt 
out,  for  the  spiritual  health  and  strength  of  his  faithful  peo* 
pie.    Who  then  can  have  any  power  to  distribute  his  provi- 
sion but  those  to  whom  he  has  given  authority  for  that  pur- 
pose ?    Who  can  pretend  to  meddle  with  the  "  mysteries  of 
God,"  or  to  administer  the  blessings  of  his  holy  and  vener- 
able sacraments,  without  a  sufficient  warrant  for  so  doing  I 
Nothing  can  be  more  evident,  from  the  nature  of  the  thing, 
than  that  they  who  are  called  God's  stewards,  must  have 
.his  commission  and  authority  for  what  they  do,  in  their 
jseveral  serv'ices  to  his  people.      And  St.  Paul  puts  the 
j-natter  beyond  all  doubt,  when  he  tells  us,  that  "  God  has 
actually  *e?,"  or  constituted  officers,  and  these  too  of  dif- 
ferent orders,  in  the  church  ;^  which  we  may  know  to  be 
done  by  him,  when  we  see  it  done  in  the  manner  prescribed 
by  that  Almighty  King  and  Head  of  the  church,  who  has 
all  power  in  heaven  and  in  earth,  and  from  whom  all  eccle- 
.siastical  authority  must  be  derived.     Every  ministry,  there- 
fore, that  does  not  lead  up  to  him,  through  his  apostles  and 
their  successors,  is  but  a  bold  intrusion  into  the  sacred  of- 
fice ;  an  unwarrantable  usurpation  of  those  rights,  which  he 
made  over  to  his  appointed  messengers,  when  "  he  sent 
them,  even  as  the  Father  had  sent  him,"  with  power  to  do 
.as  he  had  done,  and  perpetuate  the  ministerial  order,  ac- 
cording to  the  dispensation  of  the  gospel,  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  he  had  begun  it.     This  is  the  only  way  in  which  it 
can  be  regularly  carried  forward,  on  the  plan  laid  down  by- 
its  gracious  Founder  ;  and  with  respect  to  which  plan,  we 
may  truly  say,  as  of  all  the  other  parts  of  his  holy  religion, 
that  what  it  was  "  yesterday,"  and  is  "  to-day,"  the  same 
it  must  continue  "  for  ever;" — ^nothing  must  be  "  added  to 
it,  or  taken  from  it." 

*  1  Cor.  xii.  23 
11 


S2  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

There  are  some,  however,  even  of  the  Christian  profes- 
sion, who  do  not  admit  the  truth  of  this  position  ;  and  we 
are  not  ignorant  of  the  arguments,  such  as  they  are,  on 
which  their  rejection  of  it   is  founded.-^—"  It  cannot  be 
proved,"  they  say,  "  that  any  plan  6r  form  of  ecclesiastical 
government  was  laid  down  in  the  Christian  church,  or  that 
any  command  was  gi^en  by  Christ  for  that  purpose.     And 
even  admitting,  that  something  like  Episcopacy  was  ap- 
poirited  by  the  apostles,"  still  they  insist,  that  "  such  an, 
appointment  could  only  take  place,  in  consequence  of  the 
particular  circumstances  of  the  church  at  that  time,   and 
without  any  view  to  its  being  a  permanent  establishment ; 
because  no  precise  constitution  could  be  framed,  which 
would  suit  the  church  in  its  necessary  accommodation  to 
the  different  arrangements  of  civil  policy,   or  be  equally 
agreeable  to  the  various  nations,  which  might  embrace  the 
Christian  faith."    Such  reasoning  as  this,  if  supported  by 
any  thing  like  proof,  might,  no  doubt,  be  acknowledged  to 
have  some  weight,  were  it  not  also  certain,  that  the  consti- 
tution of  the  church,  the  authority  of  her  ministers,  and 
the  validity  of  her  sacraments,  are  all  inseparably  connected, 
as  nriatters  of  the  greatest  importance  in  the    Christian 
scheme  of  salvation,  and  must  be  esteemed  as  such  bv  all 
who  have  a  just  sense  of  the  high  origin,  and  inestimable 
value  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.    To  those  who  consider  the 
religion  of  our  adorable  Redeemer,  as  nothing  more  than 
a  republication  of  what  they  call  the  Religion  of  Nature, 
it  must,  to  be  sure,  appear  very  absurd  and  ridiculous,  to 
be  inquiring  into,  or  disputing  about,  the  external  polity  or 
government  of  the  church ;  since  in  their  opinion  the  only 
thing  necessary,  is  to  find  out  how  far  the  precepts  of  the 
gospel  agree  with  the  moral  fitness  of  things,  and  are  sup- 
ported by  the  law  or  feelings  of  nature,  and  the  deductions 
of  human  reason.    But  surely  they  who  regard  Christianity 
as  a  religion  of  divine  institution ;   who  believe,  that  its 
gracious  Author  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners,  and 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  ZZ 

Aat "  his  name  is  the  only  name  under  heaven  whereby 
they  can  be  saved ;"  that  his  sacraments  of  baptism,  and 
the  eucharist,  are  the  appointed  means  of  uniting  us  to  him, 
and  preserving  us  in  that  union,  and  derive  all  their  eiEcacy 
and  importance  from  his  blessing  and  sanctification  of  them : 
Such  persons  cannot  possibly  think  it  a  matter  of  indiffer- 
ence, whether  the  hand  from  which  they  receive  these 
sacraments,  be  the  hand  of  an  administrator,  whp  derives 
his  authority  from  Christ,  and  is  empowered  to  bless  in  his 
name,  or  the  hand  of  one  who  has  nothing  of  that  kind  but 
what  he  has  taken  to  himself,  or  received  from  those,  who 
had  as  little  power  as  he,  to  grant  any  such  call  or  com- 
mission. 

But  to  consider  the  validity  of  the  Christian  sacraments, 
and  the  authority  of  those  who  administer  them,  as  mat- 
ters of  such  high  importance,  we  have  been  told  by  a  late 
popular  writer,^  "  is  placing  the  essence  of  religion,  not  in 
any  thing  interior  and  spiritual,  not  in  what  Christ  and  his 
apostles  placed  it,  something  personal  in  regard  to  the 
disciple,  and  what  is  emphatically  styled  in  scripture,  the 
hidden  man  of  the  heart ;  but  in  an  exterior  circumstance, 
a  circumstance  which,  in  regard  to  him,  is  merely  accident 
tal,  a  circumstance  of  which  it  may  be  inipossible  for  him 
to  be  apprized."  And  so,  we  may  say,  may  ^'  his  belief 
and  obedience  of  the  gospel,"  be  merely  accidental,  and 
depending  on  the  circumstance  of  his  being  bom  and  edu- 
cated in  a  Christian  country,  yet  not  the  less  acceptable  to 
God,  or  beneficial  to  himself,  on  that  account.  But  the 
author  of  the  work  to  which  I  am  now  alluding,  calls  it 
"  an  absurdity  to  make  the  truth  of  God's  promises  de^ 
pend  on  circumstantials ;"  and  to  him  "  nothing  is  more 
evident,  than  that  the  essence  of  Christianity,  abstractedly 
considered,  consists  in  the  system  of  doctrines  and  duties 


•  See  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical  History^  by  George  Campbell,  D.  D 
Principal  of  Marischal  College,  Aberdeen.    Vol,  i.  p.  86,  &c. 


84.  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated. 

revealed  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  the  essence 
of  the  Christian  character  consists  in  the  belief  of  the  one, 
and  the  obedience  of  the  other."  Although  we  acknow- 
ledge, in  general,  the  truth  of  this  observation,  we  cannot  see 
much  propriety,  or  any  advantage  arising  to  religion,  in  thus 
splitting  it  into  essentials  and  circumstantials^  for  the  sake 
of  weighing  the  one  against  the  other ;  because  there  is 
imich  danger  of  not  making  a  proper  division  :  and  so  by 
mistaking  the  nature  of  what  is  essential^  and  what  circum- 
stantial, we  may  throw  into  the  one  scale  what  should  be 
placed  in  the  other,  and  thereby  make  a  separation  of  what 
God  has  been  pleased  to  join  together  for  our  comfort  and 
instruction.  It  was,  therefore,  well  observed  by  a  learned 
and  ingenious  author,*  that  "  as  it  is  one  of  the  peculiar 
weaknesses  of  human  nature,  when,  upon  a  comparison  of 
two  things,  one  is  found  to  be  of  greater  importance  than 
the  other,  to  consider  this  other  as  of  scarce  any  importance 
at  all ;  it  is  highly  necessary,  that  we  remind  ourselves, 
how  great  presumption  it  is,  to  make  light  of  any  institu- 
tions of  divine  appointment  j  that  our  obligations  to  obey 
all  God's  commands  whatever  are  absolute  and  indispen- 
sable ;  and  that  commands  merely  positive,  admitted  to  be 
from  him,  lay  us  under  a  moral  obligation  to  obey  him — . 
an  obligation  moral  in  the  strictest  and  most  proper  sense." 
Hence  it  would  appear,  that  there  is  not  so  much  ground 
as  is  generally  imagined  for  the  common  distinction  of 
moral  2knd  positive  dutits;  which,  being  both  alike  foimded 
in  die  v/ill  and  revelation  of  God,  must  be  equally  binding 
on  man,  and  can  admit  of  no  other  variety  of  obligation  on 
our  part,  than  what  is  determined  by  our  Lord's  own  deci- 
sion of  tliis  matter—"  These  ought  ye  to  have  done,  and 


*  Bishop  Eutlev,  in  his  Analogy,  ccc.  p.  19S,  of  the  fifth  edition — a 
work  which  contains  much  elaborate  reasoning  in  favour  of  reveUiticn, 
yet  surely  ascribes  by  far  too  much  consequence  to  it.r.  pretended  rival,  the 
light  or  religion  of  nature. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated,  85 

not  to  leave  the  other  undone."^  If  we  see  sufficient  rea- 
son to  embrace  the  religion  of  Christ,  as  the  only  ground 
on  which  we  can  hope  for  salvation  and  happiness,  we 
must  also  be  convinced,  that,  in  order  to  promote  that  im- 
portant end,  it  must  be  received  whole  and  entire  ;  as  a 
combined  "  system  of  doctrines  and  duties,"  requiring 
our  "  belief  of  the  one,  and  obedience  of  the  other,"  with- 
out any  other  reference  to  our  judgment  and  discretion, 
than  what  is  necessary  for  our  discovering,  that  these 
*'  doctrines  and  duties  were  revealed  by  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,"  either  immediately  while  he  sojourned  on  earth, 
or  after  his  ascension  into  heaven,  by  means  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  was  "  to  guide  his  apostles  into  all  truth." 

So  far  then  we  are  agreed  with  the  learned  Lecturer  on 
Ecclesiastical  History^  whose  words  I  have  now  quoted^ 
though  we  shall  afterwards  have  frequent  occasion  to  differ 
from  him.  In  his  subsequent  description  of  what  he  deemed 
to  be  the  "  essence  of  Christianity,"  we  think,  he  ought  to 
have  mentioned,  what  he  could  not  but  know,  that  a  part  of 
the  "  system  of  duties,"  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  our 
I^ord's  apostles,  and  expressly  enjoined  by  one  of  them, 
was  obedience  and  submission  to  those  who  have  a  right  to 
*'  guide  or  rule  over  us,  and  to  watch  for  our  souls  i"!  And 
as  it  is  impossible  that  such  a  right  as  this  can  be  possessed 
by  any  man,  or  order  of  men,  who  have  not  derived  it  from 
the  great  Shepherd  and  Bishop  of  souls,  in  the  way  that  he 
appointed  for  the  transmission  of  it,  we  cannot  but  consider 
it  as  a  matter  of  the  highest  importance  to  ascertain,  as  far 
as  we  are  able,  in  what  form  of  church  go\'eniment  this 
right  was  originally  invested,  because  to  that  government 
alone  can  such  obedience  and  submission  be  due. 

On  this  point,  our  Ecclesiastical  Lecturer  is  obliged  to 
allow — "  that  a  certain  external  model  of  government  must 
have  been  originally  adopted  for  the  more  effectual  preser- 

*  St.  Mat.  xxiii.  25.  t  Heb.  xili.  1/. 


86'  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated, 

vatlon  of  the  evangelical  institution  in  its  native  purity,  and 
for  the  careful  transmission  of  it  to  after  ages."*  And 
when  there  were  such  strong  reasons  for  the  original  adop- 
tion of  a  "  certain  external  model  of  government,"  it  may 
well  be  presumed,  that  the  apostles,  supposing  them  to 
have  been  only  possessed  of  common  judgment,  without 
the  benefit  of  inspiration,  could  not  fail,  as  governors  of  the 
church,  to  take  the  most  effectual  steps  for  the  future  esta- 
blishment of  what  was  so  necessary  to  be  adopted.  Nay, 
so  much  was  even  Dr.  Campbell  convinced  of  the  necessity 
of  such  an  apostolic  institution  of  government,  that  he  pro- 
nounces "  any  presumptuous  encroachment  on  what  is 
evidently  so  instituted,  to  be  justly  reprehensible  in  those 
who  are  properly  chargeable  with  such  encroachment,  as 
is  indeed  any  violation  of  order,  and  more  especially  wheii 
the  violation  tends  to  wound  charity,  and  to  promote  divi- 
sion and  strife."  Happy  had  it  been  for  the  church  in  this 
kingdom,  if  what  is  here  observed  had  been  duly  attended 
to  by  those  from  whom  the  author  of  this  just  remark 
derived  his  ministry, — ^^Yet,  as  if  afraid  that  he  had  gone 
too  far  in  censuring  such  presumptuous  encroachment  as 
justly  reprehensible,  he  immediately  adds — '■'•  But  the  re- 
prehensic«i  can  affect  those  only  who  are  conscious  of  the 
guilt ;  for  the  fault  of  another  will  never  frustrate  to  me 
the  divine  promise  given  by  the  Messiah,  the  great  Inter- 
preter of  the  Father,  the  faithful  and  true  Witness  to  all 
indiscriminately,  without  any  limitation,  that  he  who  re- 
ceiveth  his  testimony  hath  everlasting  life." 

There  is  a  sense,  in  which  part  of  this  reasoning  may 
be  received  as  well-founded  ;  but  we  cannot  so  easily  per- 
ceive the  connection,  by  which  the  following  conclusion  is 
drawn  from  it.  "  I  may  be  deceived,"  says  the  author, 
"  in  regard  to  the  pretensions  of  a  minister,  who  may  be 
the  usurper  of  a  character  to  which  he  has  no  right.    I  am 

♦  Vol.  i.  p.  8r. 


Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicated.  87 

no  antiquary,  and  may  not  have  either  the  knowledge,  or 
the  capacity  necessary  for  tracing  the  faint  outlines  of  an- 
cient establishments,  and  forms  of  government,  for  enter- 
ing into  dark  and  critical  questions  about  the  import  of 
names  and  titles,  or  for  examining  the  authenticity  of  end- 
less genealogies  ;  but  I  may  have  all  the  evidence  that  con- 
sciousness can  give,  that  I  thankfully  receive  the  testimony 
of  Christ,  whom  I  believe,  and  love,  and  serve."* 

But  surely  this  all-sufficient  coJiscioiisness  must  arise 
from  some  source  or  other  :  and  where  there  is  a  want  of 
the  "  knowledge  or  capacity  necessary"  for  such  inquiries 
as  are  here  alluded  to,  there  must  be  an  implicit  reliance 
on  the  skill  and  fidelity  of  those  teachers  or  spiritual  guides, 
who  ought  to  serve  as  "  eyes  to  the  blind,  and  feet  to  the 
lame,"  who  seem  to  be  particularly  pointed  out  for  that 
purpose  in  the  authoritative  direction  delivered  to  God's 
people  in  these  words — "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  stand  ye 
in  the  ways,  and  see,  and  ask  for  the  old  paths,  where  is 
the  good  way,  and  walk  therein,  and  ye  shall  find  rest  for 
your  souls."'!'  There  were  many,  no  doubt,  in  the  days  of 
Jeremiah,  who  might  have  availed  themselves  of  this  plea, 
that  "  they  were  no  antiquaries,  and  had  neither  the  know- 
ledge nor  capacity  that  was  necessary"  for  such  laborious 
and  useless  investigation.  Yet  the  command  is  general, 
and  sufficient  instruction  given  how  to  proceed  in  discharg- 
ing the  duty  enjoined.  There  is  a  "  good  way"  pointed 
out  for  walking  in,  among  the  "  old  paths,"  which  are  to  be 
found  out  by  "  asking,"  with  eaniestness  and  circumspec- 
tion.— ^"  Stand  ye  in  the  ways,  and  see^  and  ask  for  the  old 
paths."-—"  Asking"  implies  some  person  or  thing,  of  whom 
inquiry  may  be  made  ;  as  where  the  children  of  Israel  were 
commanded  to  "  ask  their  fathers,"  and  to  "  ask  of  the  days 
that  were  past,"  for  such  information  as  was  necessaiy  for 
directing  their  conduct.    The  same  instructive  information 

•  Vol.  i.  p.  88.  t  Jer.  vi.  16. 


88  Primitive  Truth  and  Order  vindicatett* 

may  still  be  obtained,  if  we  are  at  due  pains  to  apply  for  it, 
and  do  not  trust  too  much  to  that  inward  "  consciousness," 
which  often  promises  rest  to  the  soul,  without  the  trouble 
of  any  outward  inquiry  about  "  coming"  to  that  Saviour, 
in  the  way  and  manner  which  he  has  prescribed,  who  alone 
can  bestow  this  inestimable  blessing,  and  "  give  rest  to  the 
soul  that  is  weary  and  heavy  laden."^ 

Having,  therefore,  already  considered  his  holy  religion, 
the  only  way  in  which  we  can  "  come  to  him"  for  spiritual 
rest  and  comfort,  as,  like  himself — "  the  same  yesterday, 
torday,  and  for  ever ;"  and  being,  I  hope,  well  convinced, 
that  it  ought  to  be  received  and  embraced,  just  as  it  is  re- 
presented and  held  out  in  the  scriptures  of  truth,  without 
*'  adding  thereto,  or  diminishing  from  it,"  we  shall  now 
proceed,  in  consequence  of  what  has  been  said,  to  establish 
another  no  less  evident  and  important  fact,  which  shall  be 
the  subject  of  the  following  chapter. 

*  St.  Matt.  xi.  9.9. 


f 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  Church  of  Christy  in  which  his  Religion  is  received  and 
embraced^  is  that  spiritual  Society^  in  which  the  Ministra* 
tion  of  holy  Things  is  committed  to  the  three  distinct  Orders 
of  Bishops^  Priests  and  Deacons^  deriving  their  Authority 
from  the  Apostles^  as  those  Apostles  received  their  Commis- 
sion from  Christ, 

W  HEN  the  converted  Hebrews  received  this  command 
from  an  inspired  apostle — "  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule 
over  you,  and  submit  yourselves  ;  for  they  watch  for  your 
souls  ;"*  they  were  thereby  put  in  mind,  not  only  that  they 
had  souls  to  be  "  watched  for,"  but  also  that  the  power  or 
authority,  which  these  watching  rulers  had  over  them,  was 
of  a  spiritual  nature,  and  such  as  had  relation  to  that  spiri- 
,tual  life,  which,  after  being  begun  on  earth,  was  intended  to 
last  for  ever  in  heaven. — This  single  obsen'ation  presents 
us  with  a  just  view  of  the  difference  between  these  two 
sorts  of  government,  which  have  the  things  of  earth,  and 
the  things  of  heaven  for  their  several  objects :  A  distinc- 
tion which  St.  Paul,  in  another  place,  seems  to  point  out  as 
worthy  of  our  notice,  when  he  tells  us,  "  the  first  man  is  of 
the  earth,  earthy ;  the  second  man  is  the  Lord  from  hea^ 
ven."'!'     Our  earthy  man  must,  therefore,  be  ruled  and 
directed  by  such  means  and  instruments,  that  is,  by  such 
forms  or  modes  of  government,  as  are  suited  to  the  various 
situations  of  things  on  this  earth  ;  where  we  are  placed  for 
a  while,  as  in  a  school  of  instruction,  to  fit  and  prepare  us 
for  a  more  pure  and  permanent  state  in  that  heaven,  from 
which  came  the  second  man,  the  Lord, — the  Almight}' 

•  H€b.  xiii.  17,  t  1  Cor.  XV.  47. 

12 


0  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

Restorer  of  our  nature,  to  establish  a  government  suited  to 
the  gracious  design  of  his  coming,  and  most  admirably  cal- 
culated to  qualify  and  dispose  his  happy  subjects  for  the 
possession  of  that  utifading  inheritance  reserved  for  them 
in  "  his  everlasting  kingdom." 

;  Looking  forward,  with  prophetic  eye,  to  the  estabhsh- 
ment  of  this  spiritual  kingdom,  and  to  the  solemn  inaugu- 
ration of  its  heavenly  King,  the  inspired  Psalmist  might 
justly  say  of  it ;  "  This  is  the  Lord's  doing,  and  it  is  mar- 
vellous in  our  eyes."*  The  setting  up  a  pure  and  spiritual 
kingdom  in  the  midst  of  a  carnal  and  wicked  world,  and  in 
spite  of  all  the  opposition  which  the  prince  of  this  world 
could  make  to  it ;  the  founding  this  spiritual  building  on  a 
rock^  "  agaiiist  which  the  gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail," 
was  surely  an  astonishing  exertion  of  divine  power,  and 
such  as  evidently  showed  the  hand  of  that  Almighty  Lord, 
who  can  do  what  he  pleaseth  both  in  heaven  and  in  earth* 

The  "  doings"  of  men  are  sometimes  a  little  "  marv^el- 
lous  in  our  eyes,"  when  we  see  them  not  only  pulling  do%vn 
and  destroying  those  venerable  fabrics  of  civil  government, 
iwhich  have  stood  for  ages, — the  pride  of  human  policy,' — 
but  even  attempting  to  subvert  the  foundation  of  that  eccle- 
siastical system,  which,  resting  on  the  solid  ground  of 
divine  institution,  is  not  to  be  altered  or  new-modelled,  as 
the  work  of  human  device,  or  in  conformity  to  the  manners, 
the  prejudices,  or  civil  constitutions  of  the  different  nations, 
in  which  the  Christian  church  has  obtained  a  settlement. 
Here  we  cannot  but  observe  a  remarkable  difference  be- 
tween the  '''  doing  of  the  Lord,"  and  that  of  man,  with 
regard  to  the  nature  of  their  respective  works. — What  the 
former  does,  is  done  at  once,  and  produced  in  full  per- 
fection, according  to  the  nature  of  the  work,  and  the  design 
.which  God  has  in  view  by  producing  it.  It  has  therefore 
been  justly  observed,  that  "  God  never  made  his  works  for 

*  Psalm  cxviii.  23. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  dl 

man  to  mend  ;"  nor  does  it  become  a  poor,  dependent,  fal* 
lible  rreature,  to  interfere  with,  or  pretend  to  alter,  the 
appointments  of  the  supreme,  all-wise  and  good  Creator, 
It  is  enough  for  man  to  reform  and  improve  himself,  to 
amend  what  is  amiss  in  his  own  conduct,  and  correct  those 
errors  and  mistakes,  which  experience  will  discover  in  the 
best  and  wisest  plans  of  government  that  have  ever  been 
devised  by  human  ingenuity.  These,  it  seems,  can  only 
be  brought  to  their  admired  perfection  by  slow  and  leisurely 
degrees.  Even  the  boasted  constitution  of  this  country, 
which  has  been  so  often  proposed  as  a  pattern  to  the  neigh- 
bouring nations,  is  well  known  to  have  been  the  gradual 
work  of  ages,  the  happy  consequence  of  that  progressive 
spirit  of  improvement,  which  can  never  be  so  properly 
(exercised,  as  in  contriving  means  to  supply  the  defects  of 
human  foresight,  and  to  secure  to  society  the  benefits 
arising  from  the  accumulated  experience  of  successive 
generations. 

All  this  is  very  proper  and  necessary  to  be  attended  to, 
as  far  as  we  are  concerned  with  the  works  and  inventions 
of  men,  and  obliged  to  show  a  due  regard  to  the  various 
schemes  of  human  policy,  which  have  been  contrived,  and 
established,  for  thus  securing,  as  far  as  may  be,  the  peace 
and  good  government  of  this  world.  But  the  temporal 
peace  and  prosperity  of  such  a  vain  and  transitory  world, 
cannot  surely  be  the  only,  nor  the  principal  object,  which 
man  has  to  regard  and  attend  to,  considered  as  a  candidate 
for  eternal  happiness  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Viewing 
himself  in  this  light,  he  cannot  but  see  the  necessity  of  cul- 
tivating a  proper  acquaintance  with  the  laws  and  government 
of  that  kingdom,  and  of  submitting  to  that  course  of  pro- 
bation and  discipline  which  has  been  appointed  for  the 
church  of  Christ,  while  militant  here  on  earth,  to  prepare 
it  for  that  triumphant  state,  which  it  is  at  last  to  enjoy  with 
its  glorious  Head  in  heaven.— When  the  pious  well-dis- 
posed Christian  sets  himself  to  acquire  a  proper  knowledge 


^  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

of  his  duty  in  this  respect ;  what  a  happy  circumstance  is  it 
for  him,  that  the  nature  and  constitution  of  Christ's  king-^ 
dom,  as  settled  by  himself,  were  fully  declared,  and  made 
known  to  his  apostles ;  those  select  officers,  to  whom  the 
original  commission  was  given,  "  to  convert  the  nations^ 
and  teach  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  he  had 
commanded  them  ?"  On  this  subject  every  necessary  infor* 
mation  may  be  derived  from  the  doctrine  and  practice  of 
these  aposties,  as  handed  do^vn  in  the  inspired  writings  of 
the  New  Testament,  and  explained  and  illustrated  by  the 
concurring  testimony  of  the  first  and  purest  ages  of  the 
gospel;  all  which  exhibit  in  the  clearest  light  the  foundation 
of  the  Christian  church,  the  form  of  government  esta- 
blished in  it,  and  the  manner  in  which  it  is  to  be  supported 
by  its  Divine  Founder,  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

Our  knowledge  of  all  these  circumstances  points  out  the 
peculiar  nature  of  that  spiritual  kingdom  erected  by  Christ, 
and  shows  how  widely  it  differs,  even  in  its  first  erection^ 
from  the  kingdoms  of  this  world.  Their  constitutions  and 
forms  of  government  are  perpetually  changing.  What  one 
aation  adopts,  another  rejects:  What  is  admired  in  thia 
age,  perhaps  will  be  reprobated  in  the  next ;  because  the 
mind  of  man  is  not  capable  of  fixing  to  itself  any  certain 
standard  for  adjusting  the  merits  of  diose  numberless  po* 
Utical  theories,  which  are  daily  getting  abroad  into  the 
world.  But  what  was  beyond  the  compass  of  human  ability, 
has  been  accomplished  by  divine  power  and  authority. 
The  church  or  kingdom  of  God,  as  we  have  already  ob* 
served,  with  respect  to  his  holy  religion  in  general,  came 
good  and  perfect  from  his  hands,  and  might  well  suffer^ 
but  could  never  be  improved  by  the  inventions  of  men. 
In  tracing  it  to  its  purest  source,  the  fountains  of  antiquity 
must  be  resorted  to,  otherwise  we  shall  see  but  darkly  into 
the  troubled  waters  of  latter  times,  which  faction  and  party 
have  been  continually  stirring,  and  thereby  producing  end^ 
less  disorder  and  confusion.     Such  must  alwavs  be  the 


Qeneyal  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  93 

case,  when  men  attempt  to  form  a  religion,  and  a  church 
fdr  themselves,  and  are  not  satisfied  with  what  God  has 
provided  for  them. 

We  must,  therefore,  endeavour  to  make  ourselves  suf- 
ficiendy  acquainted  with  what  the  goodness  of  God  in  this 
respect  has  done  for  the  children  of  men  j  and  with  the  book 
of  revelation  in  our  hands,  v/e  shall  be  at  no  loss  to  disco- 
ver how  well  the  one  part  of  the  sacred  volume  agrees  with 
the  other,  and  both  point  to  the  same  object  under  every 
dispensation  ;  still  representing  the  church  or  people  of 
God  as  one  body,  actuated  by  one  spirit,  and  established 
in  one  and  the  same  faith  and  hope.  Thus  looking  back, 
with  a  well-directed  eye,  to  the  state  of  the  church,  through 
its  several  progressive  stages,  from  its  first  establishment 
in  Paradise,  and  its  confinement  afterwards  to  one  smgle 
family  in  the  ark,  we  can  trace  its  enlargement  in  the  pos- 
terity of  the  chosen  fiuher  of  the  faithful  race,  its  wander- 
ing state  in  the  wilderness,  its  settlement  in  the  promised 
land,  and  all  that  happened  to  it,  till  the  fulness  of  time 
came  for  the  manifestation  of  its  God  and  Redeemer^ 
who  was  to  put  his  finishing  hand  to  the  constitution  of  this 
spiritual  society,  and  place  it  on  a  sure  and  immoveable 
foundation.  Through  the  whole  of  this  extended  view, 
one  striking  circumstance  must  constantly  arrest  our  atten- 
tion ;  that  under  everj^  dispensation  of  divine  grace,  some 
particular  persons  were  set  apart  for  performing  the  sacred 
rites  of  religion,  and  clothed  with  suitable  authority  for  that 
purpose.  The  inspired  history  says  but  little  of  what  is  called 
the  patriarchal  economy.  But  even  in  the  concise  account 
which  is  given  of  that  period,  we  see  evident  marks  of  the 
divine  institution  of  sacrifice,  as  the  most  essential  part  of 
religious  worship,  and  may  thence  justly  infer  that  a  priest- 
hood also  was  instituted  to  minister  in  holy  things  ;  since 
there  was  the  same  reason  for  setting  apart  certain  persons 
to  represent  Christ  the  Priest^  as  there  was  for  constituting 
certain  offerings  to  represent  Christ  the  Sacrifice,    For 


94  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

maintaining  this  consistencv,  we  have  every  reason  to  be*., 
lieve,  that  the  right  to  minister  was  given  to  the  first-bon^: 
as  types  of  Him,  who  was  to  be  "  the  First-born  andong 
many  brethren ;"  and  it  was  on  account  of  Esau's  despising 
and  seUing  this  right,  that  he  was  denominated  "  a  profdne 
person  ;"*  one  who  had  no  just  sense  of  God's  appointment^ 
or  the  regard  which  was  due  to  sacred  things  j  for  which 
reason  he  was  set  aside  from  the  office,  and  the  honour  of 
the  priesthood  was  transferred  to  his  brother  Jacob. 

When  we  come  down  to  the  establishment  of  the  church 
under  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  we  perceive  its  form  and 
ministry,  its  authority  and  indepejidence,  displayed  in  the 
clearest  manner:  and  these  things  are  frequently  referred 
to  in  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  which  point  td 
the  ancient  constitution  as  still  to  be  maintained  in  all  things 
essential  to  the  being  of  a  church.     Thus  viewing  the  di- 
vine conduct  in  the  light  which  revelation  throws  upon  it, 
we  ai-e  taught  to  consider  the  Jewish  dispensation  as  the 
infancy  of  the   Christian,  and  the  Christian,   as  the  full 
growth,  and  mature  perfection  of  the  Jewish.    But  in  both, 
the  body  is  formed  after  the  same  model ;  and  we  can  trace 
a  similarity  of  features  and  lineaments,  such  as  is  observed 
in  the  progressive  advancement  of  our  o\vn  bodies  from  4 
infancy  to  manhood.     To  be  sure,  "  as  the  economy  of 
man's  salvation  forms  one  complete  whole,  it  may  well  be 
supposed,  that  there  will  be  an  uniformity  in  its  several-. 
parts  ;"t     And  when  we  find  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac^i^; 
and  Jacob,  regulating  the  service  of  the  Israelitish  church^q 
by  the  express  appointment  of  those  who  were  to  ministdr;e> 
in  it,  we  may  justly  infer,  that  the  same  God,  when  mani*- 
Tested  in  the  flesh  for  its  salvation,  would  adopt  a  similar 
plan  in  the  Christian  church ;  thereby  showing,  that  the 


*  Heb.  xii.  16. 

t  See  this  urga merit  well  handled  in  Mr.  Daubeny's  excellent  Guide  to 
the  Church,  p.  25,  &c. 


Oeneral  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  95 

^  law  being  a  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,"  bore  a  re- 
semblance in  all  respects  to  the  substance,  which  the  gospel 
exhibited.  The  law  was  adorned  with  a  priesthood  of 
God's  own  institution — a  high  priest,  and  priests  of  his 
own  calling— a  whole  tribe  of  Levites  of  his  own  select- 
ing, separated  from  the  rest  of  the  people,  and  peculiarly 
set  apart  for  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  ;  which,  with  all 
its  holy  things,  was  a  type  or  figure  of  the  body,  and  con- 
sequently of  the  church  of  Christ.  In  this  church,  there- 
fore, "  which  is  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all 
in  all,"  we  may  expect  to  find  the  full  completion  of  all 
that  was  prefigured  under  the  Mosaic  economy ;  and  as  the 
Hebrew  ministry  was  "  an  ordinance  for  ever,"  that  is,  for 
the  continuance  of  the  temple  and  nation  of  the  Hebrews, 
so  are  the  divine  institution,  and  pei'petuity  of  the  Christian 
ministry,  expressed  in  that  commission,  which  our  Lord 
gave  his  apostles; — ^'  As  my  Father  sent  me,  even  so  send 
I  you :  and — ^lo,  I  am  with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end 
of  the  world." 

If  we  inquire  into  the  history  of  these  apostles,  before 
they  received  this  final  and  most  ample  commission  from 
their  Lord  and  Master,  we  shall  find,  that  when  the  num- 
ber of  his  followers  had  considerably  increased,  and  he  was 
"  moved  With  compassion  at  seeing  the  multitudes  scattered 
abroad,  as  sheep  having  no  shepherd,"  he  thought  proper 
to  "  ordain  twelve,"  as  the  evangelist  tells  us,  "  that  they 
should  be  with  him,  and  that  he  might  send  them  forth  to*- 
preach,  and  to  have  power  to  heal  sicknesses,  and  to  cast° 
out  devils  ;"  and  these  he  named  apostles^  as  being  persons 
peculiarly  sent  with  power  to  act  in  his  name,  and  to  carry 
on  the  blessed  work,  which  he  had  so  happily  begun.  Af- 
terwards, when  the  harvest  became  too  great  for  so  few 
labourers  as  these  twelve,  our  Lord  was  pleased  to  "  ap- 
point other  seventy  also,"  who,  though  of  an  order  inferior 
to  the  apostles^  as  appears  from  their  never  being  distin- 
guished by  that  title,  were  yet  empowered  to  preach  the 


96'  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

gospel,  and  to  work  miracles  for  the  confinnation  of  their' 
doctrine.  Thus  early  do  we  observe  a  subordination 
among  the  ministers  of  Christ,  and  a  striking  similitude 
between  the  Jewish  church  and  the  Christian,  with  respect 
to  their  foundation  and  establishment.  The  former  was 
delivered  from  the  Egyptian  slavery  by  Moses  the  servant 
of  God  ;  and  the  latter  is  delivered  from  its  bondage  to  sin 
and  satan,  a  slavers^  infinitely  more  deplorable,  by  Jesus 
Christ  the  Son  of  God.  In  the  former,  the  twelve  tribes  were 
conducted  by  twelve  officers,  the  heads  of  their  several  tribes, 
who  were  all  subject  to  Moses:  and  in  the  latter,  twelve 
apostles  were  appointed  to  guide  and  instruct  the  people, 
and  themselves  to  be  obedient  in  every  thing  unto  Christ. 
And,  to  complete  the  allusion,  our  Lord's  seventy  disciples 
answered  to  the  same  number  of  the  heads  of  families,  who 
were  appointed  according  to  the  number  of  Jacob's  family 
that  went  down  with  him  into  Egypt,^  and  also  according 
to  the  number  of  the  "  seventy  men  of  the  elders  of  Israel,''' 
who  were  solemnly  set  apart  for  assisting  Moses  in  "  bear* 
ing  the  burden  of  the  people.''^  Thus,  as  some  of  the  old 
fathers  observed,  our  Lord  first  chose  twelve  apostles,  and 
afterwards  he  added  other  seventy  select  disciples,  that  by 
this  means,  the  people  discovering  the  resemblance  between 
him  and  Moses,  might  the  more  readily  believe  him  to  be 
that  Prophet,  who,  Moses  foretold,  should  come. 

Thus  far  did  our  Saviour  collect  and  gather  his  church  in 
his  own  person,  and  while  his  ministry  was  confined  to 
*'  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel ;"  on  which  account 
St.  Paul  calls  him  a  "  minister  of  the  circumcision,"  and 
he  was  frequently  styled-—"  the  King  of  the  Jews."  But 
as  his  death  was  to  take  away  the  distinction  between  Jew 
and  Gentile,  so  after  his  resurrection  he  declared,  that 
"  all  power  was  given  to  him  in  heaven  and  in  earth  j"  as  a 


*  See  Dr.  Potter  on  Church  Government,  p.  49—50. 
t  Num.  xi.  16,  17, 


General  befenCe  of  episcopacy,  95^ 

proof  of  which,  he  enlarged  the  power  of  his  apostles,  and 
gave  them  a  full  and  absolute  commission,  to  convert,  bap- 
tize and  teach,  not  the  Jews  only,  but  "  all  nations."  The 
nature  of  their  commission  is  sufficiently  expressed  by  our 
Lord's  telling  them — "  As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even 
so  send  I  you ;"  which  plainly  showed,  that  as  the  Father 
had  sent  and  empowered  him  to  collect,  constitute  and 
govern  his  church,  and  ordain  ministers  in  it,  so  he  devolved 
this  mission  and  power  upon  them ;  and  as  before  they  had 
been  only  his  personal  attendants,  waiting  his  orders  from, 
his  own  mouth,  they  were  now  to  stand  in  his  stead,  to  be 
officers  in  trust  for  the  regular  administration  of  the  affairs 
of  his  kingdom,  and  to  have  authority  to  send  others,  for 
the  purpose  of  carrying  on  and  perpetuating  the  same  plan 
which  he  had  set  on  foot,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 
Though  they  were  thus  sent  by  him,  even  as  he  had  been 
sent  by  the  Father,  yet  it  is  certain,  they  could  not  be  sent 
as  mediators  and  redeemers,  as  he  was ;  for  there  is  but 
"  one  Mediator  between  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ 
Jesus."  This  new  commission,  therefore,  must  be  under- 
wood only  of  the  authority  of  government  and  discipline 
in  the  church,  which  Christ  himself  had  received  of  the 
Father,  and  of  ordaining  others  to  the  same  office,  to  which 
the  apostles  themselves  had  been  called  by  virtue  of  their 
ordination*  While  our  Lord  himself  continued  personally 
present  with  them,  they  had  a  commission  to  baptize,  and 
preach  the  gospel,  and  to  do  such  things  as  were  most  likely 
to  gain  credit  to  their  doctiine.  But  now  being  sent  in  a 
more  ample  and  solemn  manner,  to  supply  the  place  of 
their  absent  Master,  and  carry  on  the  work  which  he  had 
begun,  they  were  empowered  to  convey  to  others  that 
Episcopal  Authority,  which  they  themselves  had  received 
from  the  chief  Shepherd  and  Bishop  of  souls  ;  that  so 
there  might  be  a  continual,  uninterrupted  succession  of 
ecclesiastical  governors  and  pastors,  who,  in  consequence  of 
his  gracious  promise,  were  to  hope  for  the  blessing  of  his 

13 


98  General  Defence  of  Episcopacyi 

spiritual  presence,  protection  and  assistance  in  the  exectf"^ 
tion  of  their  sacred  office,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 
Thus  were  the  apostles  exalted  to  the  highest  station  in 
the  church,  according  to  the  account  which  St.  Paul  gives 
of  this  matter,  when  he  tells  us-^that  "  God  hath  set  some 
in  the  church,  first  apostles."*  He  set  them  ftrst^  not 
only  in  order  of  time,  but  in  dignity  of  office,  and  distin- 
guished them  as  the  governors  of  the  church,  under  Christ 
its  supreme  Head  :  Which  enlargement  of  their  power  we 
find  them  soon  after  exercising,  by  electing  one  to  fill  up 
the  place  of  Judas,  which  had  fallen  vacant  by  his  miserable 
end,  and  prescribing  several  rites  to  be  observe^  by  the 
members  of  their  spiritual  society.  But  though  the  apostles 
were  thus  constituted  the  principal  labourers  in  God's  vine- 
yard, it  cannot  be  supposed,  from  the  daily  increase  of  the 
work  which  it  required,  that  they  could  long  be  able  to  at- 
tend to  all  the  minuter  parts  and  branches  of  it.  They 
therefore  found  it  necessary,  according  to  the  model  esta- 
blished by  their  blessed  Master,  to  continue  that  other  in- 
ferior order  of  church  officers,  in  which  capacity  themselves 
had  served  under  him,  while  he  was  upon  earth.  These 
are  often  mentioned  under  the  title  of  presbyters  or  elder s^ 
though  the  express  time  and  manner  of  ordaining  them  be 
not  particularly  recorded.  Thus  we  are  told  of  the  apos- 
tles Paul  and  Barnabas,  that  in  the  course  of  their  travels 
*'  for  confirming  the  souls  of  the  disciples,  they  ordained 
them  elders  or  presbyters  in  every  church."f  St.  James 
directs  the  sick  to  "  call  for  the  elders  or  presbyters  of  the 
church  to  pray  for  them."J  St.  Peter  warns  those  to 
whom  he  wrote,  to  be  "  obedient  to  their  elders^  and  he  ex- 
horts these  elders  or  presbyters  to  feed  the  flock  of  God 
which  was  among  them."§  St.  Paul  puts  Titus  in  mind, 
that  he  "  had  left  him,"   as  bishop,  "  in  Crete,  that  he 

*  1  Cor.  xii.  28.  %  St.  James  v.  14. 

t  Acts  xiv.  23.  §  1  St.  Peter  v.  1—5. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  99 

should  set  in  order  the  things  that  were  want'mg,  and  or- 
dain elders  in  every  city."*  The  elders^  in  all  these  passages, 
are  the  same  with  presbyters  or  priests^  the  second  order  of 
ministers  in  the  church,  whom  we  may  suppose  St.  Paul  to 
have  had  in  his  eye,  when,  after  mentioning — that  "  God 
had  set  some  in  the  church,  first  apostles" — he  added, 
"  secondarily  ;&r(7/>Ae^*;"  the  word  prophet  being  often  ap- 
plied to  signify  a  person  acting  by  a  divine  commission,  and 
employed  in  God's  immediate  service,  but  without  convey- 
ing the  idea  of  his  foretelling  future  events,  which  is  now 
commonly  affixed  to  the  word  prophet. 

But  we  have  farther  to  observe,  from  the  information 
given  us  in  the  history  of  the  apostles,  that  soon  after  they 
had  received  their  Episcopal  power,  they  ordained  another 
order  of  church  mmisters,  who,  from  the  nature  of  their 
office,  were  peculiarly  distinguished  as  deacons  or  servants. 
There  were  seven  of  these  ordained  at  first,  because  the 
apostles  judged  such  a  number  sufficient  to  supply  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  church  at  that  time.  They  had  the  charge 
of  the  poor  people,  and  took  care  of  the  charitable  collec- 
tions that  were  made  for  their  relief.  But  they  had  also 
authorit}^,  as  they  now  have  with  their  bishop's  license,  to 
preach  the  gospel,  and  to  baptize  where  a  higher  minister 
cannot  be  had.  Thus  we  find  Philip,  who  was  one  of  them, 
baptizing  the  eunuch  ;t  while  Stephen,  another  of  them,  suf- 
fered death,  for  preaching  the  gospel  to  his  own  country- 
men.J  Accordingly  this  office  was  regularly  continued  in 
the  church ;  and  in  every  council  or  synod,  mention  is 
made  of  the  deacons,  their  powers  are  confirmed,  and  their 
duties  explained,  as  being  the  persons  alluded  to,  whom 
the  apostle  says,  God  has  set  in  the  church,  as  "thirdly 
/eac/zer6'."|| 

These  seem  to  be  all  the  standing  orders  established  ia 

*  Thus  i.  5.  \  Acts  vi.  and  vik 

t  Acts  viii,  38,  11  1  Cor.  xii.  2a 


100  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

the  church  f  which  therefore  St.  Paul,  we  see,  distinguishes 
in  a  particular  manner,  by  mentioning  them  in  their  regular 
order — "  first  apostles,  secondarily  prophets,  thirdly  teach- 
ers :"  Which  three  gradations  of  office,  thus  distinguishing 
the  Christian,  as  they  had  before  distinguished  the  Jewish 
dispensation,  were  carefoUy  and  constantly  preserved  in  the 
primitive  church,  and  spread,  with  the  spreading  of  the 
gospel,  to  the  very  ends  of  the  earth.     In  every  kingdom 
and  corner  of  the  converted  world,  we  find  the  bishops,  as 
the  successors  of  the  apostles  in  all  their  ordinary  powers^ 
presiding  over  their  several  portions  of  the  flock  of  Christ; 
administering  the  sacred  rite  of  confirmation,  as  the  seal  or 
sanction  of  admission  into  that  flock  ;  ordaining  presbyters, 
as  the  pastors  of  its  several  congregations,  and  deacons  for 
the  particular  services  allotted  to  their  order ;  and  exerci- 
sing their  Episcopal  authority,  in  governing  and  inspect- 
ing, each  his  own  particular  diocese,  as  well  as  in  promot- 
ing and  preserving  the  peace,  unity  and  order  of  the  whole 
body  of   Christians.      According  to  this  plan  of  church 
government,   so  exactly  similar  to  that  which  was  esta- 
blished on  a  smaller  scale,  under  the  Levitical  priesthood, 
we  find  St.  Paul,  in  that  solemn  charge  which  he  gave  to 
Timothy,  when  appointed  bishop  of  the  church  in  Ephe- 
sus,  putting  him  in  mind,  among  many  other  things,  that 
*'  he  should  lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man  ;  that  he  shcaild 
receive  no  accusation  against  ^  presbyter^  but  before  two  or 
three  witnesses  ;  and  that  the  deacons  in  his  church  should 
be  men  of  sober  and  orderly  conversation."     Here  we  have 
a  plain  intimation  of  what  was  then,  and  afterwards  to  be, 
the  form  of  ecclesiastical  administration.     We  see  the  offi- 
cers of  the  church  distinguished  by  their  respective  sta- 
tions ;  the  bishops  as  governor  and  inspector  of  a  particular 
portion  of  it,  answering  to  the  high-priest  under  the  law ; 
and  the  presbyters  and  deacons^   subordinate  ministers  in 
it,  like  the  priests  and  Levites:  And  where  we  find  these 
orders   of  ministers  duly  appointed,   the   word  of  God 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  101 

preached,  and  his  sacraments  regularly  administered,  there 
we  find  the  church  of  Christ,  with  its  form,  its  authority, 
and  every  thing  that  is  essential  to  its  nature  and  constitu- 
tion. 

"  The  wisdom  of  God,"  says  an  admirable  writer  on  this 
Subject,  "  is  here  very  evident,  in  appointing  the  orders 
of  the  Christian  ministry  after  the  pattern  of  the  Jewish 
church,  which  was  of  his  own  appointment  so  long  before. 
That  there  might  be  no  uncertainty  in  a  case  of  such  conse- 
quence to  the  souls  of  men,  there  was  no  novelty,  but  a 
continuation  of  the  like  administration  with  that  which  had 
all  along  been  known  and  acknowledged  in  the  church. 
Aaron  was  an  high-priest^  with  a  ministry  peculiar  to  him- 
self ;  under  him  there  was  an  order  of  priests^  twenty-four 
in  number,  who  served  by  course  in  the  daily  sacrifices  and 
devotions  of  the  tabernacle  and  temple ;  and  these  were  as^ 
fiisted  by  the  whole  tribe  of  the  Levites,  As  the  law  had 
its  passover,  its  baptisms,  its  incense,  its  sacrifices,  its  con- 
secrations, its  benedictions,  all  to  be  realized  under  the 
sacraments  and  offerings  of  the  gospel,  so  its  ministry  was 
but  a  pattern  of  the  ministiy  which  is  now  among  us  ;  and 
%ve  cannot  mistake  the  one,  if  we  have  an  eye  to  the 
other;  such  is  the  goodness  of  God  in  directing  us,  through 
all  the  confusions  of  the  latter  days,  by  a  rule  of  such  great 
antiquity,  to  the  way  of  truth,  and  keeping  us  in  it."^ 

*  See  Mr.  Jones'  Essay  on  the  Church,  a  tract  most  warmly  recom- 
mended by  two  very  competent  judges  of  its  merit,  the  late  Dr.  Home, 
bishop  of  Norwich,  and  Dr.  Horsley,  now  bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  who, 
in  the  charge  which  he  delivered  at  his  second  general  visitation  of  the 
diocese  of  Rochester,  in  the  year  1800,  thus  addresses  his  clergy—"  When, 
by  assiduity  in  your  public  and  private  ministry,  by  the  purity  of  your 
lives,  and  the  soundness  of  your  doctrine,  you  have  gained  the  good  will 
and  esteem  of  your  parishioners,  they  will  be  ready  to  give  you  their 
attention  upon  a  subject,  upon  which  the  people  of  this  country,  in  gene- 
ral, much  want  good  teaching  :  I  mean  the  nature  of  the  church,  the 
necessity  of  church  communion,  and  the  danger  of  schism.  Upon  these 
points  I  know  nothing  so  well  calculated  for  general  edification,  as  a  tract, 


1G@  General  Defence  of  Episcopacif. 

God  has  many  ways  of  directing  us  to  what  is  right,  but 
none  more  instructive,  than  the  beautiful  order  and  striking 
uniformity  to  be  observed  through  all  his  dispensations  of 
grace  and  mercy,  and  particularly  in  those  which  are  con- 
nected with  the  care  and  government  of  his  church.  There 
it  is  that  men  are  to  look  for  the  "  old  paths,"  the  good  and 
approved  way  of  God's  appointment,  that  they  may  walk 
therein,  and  find  rest  to  their  souls.  But  this  can  never  be 
the  case,  if  they  take  delight  in  following  the  endless  inno- 
vations of  latter  times,  and  instead  of  seeking  rest  in  God's 
way,  and  according  to  his  direction,  are  content  ta  wander 
about  in  ways  of  their  own  devising,  and  will  never  allow 
their  souls  to  rest  on  the  basis  of  true  religion.  New 
schemes  of  faith,  and  false  systems  of  duty  are  daily  re- 
commended to  men's  deluded  fancies ;  and  notwithstanding 
all  that  has  been  said  (and  much  has  been  written  with 
great  clearness  of  reasoning)  to  show,  that  the  constitution 
of  God's  church  must  be  ever  considered  as  the  instituted 
means  of  preserving  and  conveying  the  precious  doctrines 
of  salvation,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  time,  it  is 
still  pretended,  that  the  scriptures  of  truth  give  us  no  infor- 
mation on  this  interesting  subject,  and  prescribe  no  parti- 
cular form  of  ecclesiastical  polity  "  as  necessary,  or  even 
more  acceptable  to  God  than  another." 

In  the  lectures  on  ecclesiastical  history^  of  which  we  have 


cntituled,  An  Essay  on  the  Church,  by  the  late  Rev.  William  Jones, 
some  time  of  Pluckley,  in  this  county,  but  last  of  Nayland,  in  Suffolk, 
It  has  lately  been  reprinted  in  a  small  size,  and  at  a  cheap  rate,  by  the 
Society  for  proinoting  Christian  Knowledge,  of  which  the  author  had  been 
many  years  a  most  useful  member.  Of  that  faithful  servant  of  God,  I 
can  speak,  both  from  personal  knowledge,  and  from  his  writings.  He 
was  a  man  of  quick  penetration,  of  extensive  learning,  and  the  soundest 
piety.  And  he  had,  beyond  any  other  man  I  ever  knew,  the  talent  of 
writing  upon  the  deepest  subjects  to  the  plainest  understandings.  He  is 
gone  to  his  rest,  and  his  works,   we  trust,  follow  him.     His  Catholic 

Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and  this  Essay  on  the  Church,  cannot  have  toa 

wide  a  circulation." 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  tOS 

already  taken  some  notice,  it  is  affirmed,  and  "  will  be 
owned,"  says  the  author,  "  by  those  who,  on  this  subject, 
are  capable  of  examining  with  coolness,  and  pronouncing 
with  impartiality,  that  we  have  not  that  sort  of  informa- 
tion in  holy  writ,  from  which  we  can  with  certainty  form 
a  judgment,  concerning  the  entire  model  of  the  apostolic 
church.  What  we  can  learn  thence  on  this  subject,  we 
must  collect  from  scattered  hints  given,  as  it  were,  inci- 
dentally, when  nothing  seemed  less  the  intention  of  the 
writers,  than  to  convey  to  us  a  particular  account  of  the 
plan  of  the  society  they  had  formed."^  Whether  there  be 
any  truth  in  this  observation,  or  how  much  regard  is  due 
to  it,  may  be  easily  inferred  from  what  has  been,  in  the 
foregoing  pages,  very  briefly  stated  respecting  the  "  infor- 
mation," which  may  certainly  be  obtained  from  the  writ- 
ings of  the  New  Testament,  "  by  those  who  are  capable 
of  examining  with  coolness." — And  were  there  even  less 
to  be  found  than  is  really  contained  in  the  sacred  records, 
on  the  subject  of  church  government,  the  conclusion  to  be 
drawn  from  this  seeming  silence  on  a  matter  of  such  im- 
portance, would  be  very  different  from  that  which  this 
theological  teacher  has  attempted  to  draw  from  it.  If  such 
of  the  aposdes  as  were  employed  in  writing  the  gospels 
and  epistles  that  go  by  their  respective  names,  did  not 
think  it  necessar\'^  to  mention  in  express  and  positive  terms, 
the  plan  of  the  society  which  they  had  formed  on  the  mo- 
del laid  down  by  their  blessed  Master,  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered, that  the  government  of  the  church  was  then  in  the 
hands  of  the  apostolic  college,  and  the  form  and  manner  in 
which  it  was  administered,  being  visible  to  all  who  had 
any  concern  with  it,  there  was  no  more  occasion  for  telling 
them  what  that  form  of  government  was,  than  there  would 
be  now,  in  enforcing  a  proper  behaviour  on  the  subjects  of 
this  united  kingdom,  to  tell  them,  that  they  were  governed 

f  Dr.  Campbell's  Lectures,  lect.  iv. 


104  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

by  a  King,  assisted  in  his  legislative  capacity  by  the  Lords 
and  Commons  in  parliament  assembled. 

Of  that  which  is  daily  exhibited  in  practice,  there  seems 
to  be  no  necessity  for  a  minute  description  in  theory ;   and 
^s  the  practice  of  the  apostles,  under  the  immediate  direc- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit,  was   perfectly   sufficient  to  show 
how  the  church  was  then  governed,  and  in  what  way  a 
succession  of  governors  was  to  be  continued,  as  their  Lord 
had  promised,  "  even  unto  the   end  of  the  world ;"   this 
was  a  matter,  which,  however  important  in  itself,  did  not 
require  to  be  particularly  insisted  on,  in  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament,  because  it  must  have  been  easily  known, 
and  well  understood,  by  those  persons   for  whose  imme- 
diate use  these  writings  were  originally  intended.     A  gi-eat 
number  of  these  were  either  Jews  by  descent,  or  proselytes 
to  the  Jewish  religion  before  they  embraced  the  faith  of 
Christ ;    and  to  people  of  this  description,  the  form  and 
order  of  the  priesthood  had  long  been  as  familiar  as  the 
daily  service  performed  in  the  temple  j  all  which,  they  knew, 
were  to  be  considered  as  "  types  and  shadows  of  the  good 
things'  to   come,"   under  the   dispensation  of  the  gospel. 
Viewing  the  religion  of  their  fathers  in  this  light,  as  nothing 
else  in  fact  but  Christianity  under  a  veil,  these  converted 
Jews,  or  Jewish  proselytes,  would  naturally  infer,  from 
the  little  that  was  said  on  this  subject,  that  the  same  orders 
of  priesthood  w^ere  to  be  retained  under  the  gospel  that 
had  been  established  under  the  law  ;   especially  when  they 
saxv  three  orders  actually  employed  in  the  work  of  the 
miinistry,  and  heard  of  certain  Christians  "  perishing  in  the 
gainsaying  of  Corah;"  a  thing  which  to  them  must  have 
appeared  impossible,  if  there  was  not  to  be  still  a  superior 
order  of  priesthood  in  the  church,  the  "  honour  of  which, 
no  man  was  to  take  to  himself,  but  he  that  was  called  of 
God,  as  was  Aaron."    Even  the  converts  from  heathenism 
had  been  so  long  accustomed  to  higher  and  lower  degrees, 
among  those  who  were  appointed  to  direct  its  idolatrous 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^  105 

services,  that  when  they  saw  the  worship  and  discipline  of 
the  church  conducted  by  the  three  orders  of  apostles^  pres' 
byters^  and  deacons^  they  could  not  fail  to  believe,  that  this 
plan  of  ecclesiastical  polity  was  to  be  permanent  under  the 
gospel,  as  a  similar  establishment  had  been  under  the  law 
while  it  remained  in  force,  and  that  both  were  acceptable 
to  that  God  of  order  from  whom  they  proceeded.^ 

It  is  true.  Dr.  Campbell  is  at  great  pains  to  expose  what 
he  thinks  the  absurdity  of  establishing  any  analog}^  between 
the  priesthood  of  the  Old  and  that  of  the  New  Testament; 
the  former  of  which  being  intended  to  serve  for  a  time» 
he  considers  as  "  instrumental  in  ushering  a  more  divine 
and  rational  dispensation  ;"f  more  divine  than  that,  which 
God  himself  had  instituted-— 7?zore  rational  than  that,  by 
which  the  reason  of  his  own  chosen  people  had  been  so 
long  directed !  On  this  point  he  labours,  with  uncommon 
ardour,  through  a  whole  lecture,  inveighing  against  the 
distinction  between  clergy  and  laity^  and  with  parti- 
cular severity  against,  what  he  is  pleased  to  call,  "  the 
priestly  pride  of  some  prelatical  preachers  i*^^  where  the 
force  of  the  censure,  no  doubt,  lies  in  the  beautiful  allite- 
ration or  jingle  of  the  sentence.  Were  we  disposed  to  re- 
tort in  something  like  his  own  st}4e,  it  would  not,  we  pre- 
sume, be  difficult  to  show,  that  the  pride  of  presbytery  is 
much  more  predofninant  in  these  prelections,  than  could 
have  been  expected  from  a  professor,  whose  general  cha- 
racter was  supposed  to  place  him  far  above  the  use  of  any 
such  mean,  unbecoming  language,  as  that  which  we  have 
now  quoted.  We  must  take  him,  however,  as  he  is  repre* 
aented  to  us  in  this  posthumous  publication,  which,  we 
are  assured,  "  was  left  fully  written  out  by  himself,  and  in 
a  proper  state  of  preparation  for  the  press  ;"  and  of  which 


*  See  this  point  very  properly  handled  in  the  Anti-yacobln  Rcvifiv  of 
Dr.  Campbell's  Lectures — for  June,  1801. 

f  See  his  Lectures,  Itct.  x.  |  Lecture  x, 

14 


t05  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

it  is  said,  in  an  advertisement  prefixed  to  the  work,  that 
"  such  as  are  acquainted  with  the  subject,  will  admire  the 
author's  well-digested  learning,  and  will  readily  perceive 
the  importance  of  an  accurate  historical  deduction  of  the 
progress  of  church  power,  and  the  establishment  of  a  hi- 
erarchy, and  how  clear  and  decisive  it  is,  in  all  that  ftiay 
be  termed  the  hinge  of  the  controversy  between  high 
church  and  others." 

From  this  prefatory  account  of  these  boasted  lectures^ 
and  from  what  we  have  heard  reported  of  their  extraor- 
dinary merit,  by  those  who  are  prepared  to  admire  and 
extol  whatever  has  come  from  the  pen  of  their  author,  it 
may  fairly  be  presumed,  that  they  are  considered  as  con- 
taining the  whole  strength  of  the  arguments  against  dio- 
cesan Episcopacy,  and  that  every  thing  which  could  be 
said  on  the  subject,  has  now  been  brought  forward,  "  with 
that  perspicuity,  candour  and  moderation,"  which  are  said 
to  distinguish  the  writings  of  Dr.  Campbell.  It  may,  there- 
fore, be  deemed  not  a  little  presumptuous  in  any  one,  who 
has  not  arrived  at  the  same  height  of  literary  fame,  to  at- 
tempt a  refutation  of  such  strong  and  powerful  reasoning 
as  might  be  expected  from  a  writer  whose  reputation  has 
been  long  established  "  in  the  republic  of  letters*"  The 
only  apology  I  have  to  offer  for  such  seeming  presumption, 
shall  be  furnished  by  Dr.  Campbell  himself;  who,  in  the 
introduction  to  his  ingenious  Dissertation  on  Miracles,  al- 
luding to  Mr*  Humey  as  a  "  subtle  and  powerful  adversary," 
makes  this  modest  acknowledgment,  which  I  shall  beg 
leave  to  apply  to  my  own  caise  : — "  With  such  an  adver- 
sary," as  Dr.  Campbell,  "  I  should  on  very  unequal  terms 
enter  the  lists,  had  I  not  the  advantage  of  being  on  the  side 
of  truth.  And  an  eminent  advantage  this  doubtless  is.  It 
requires  but  moderate  abihties  to  speak  in  defence  of  a  good 
cause.  A  good  cause  demands  but  a  distinct  exposition, 
and  a  fair  hearing ;  and  we  may  say  with  great  propriety^ 
it  will  speak  for  itself." 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  \07 

To  strengthen  this  confidence  in  the  goodness  of  the 
cause,  which  now  claims  our  support,  I  have  the  satisfaction 
to  observe,  that  nothing  has  been  said  against  it,  in  these 
modem,  and  by  some  so  much  admired  lectures^  but  what 
had  been  often  said  before,  by  writers  on  the  same  side,  and 
as  often  answered  by  others  of  a  different  persuasion.  Even 
Dr.  Campbell,  with  all  his  boasted  penetration,  and  ^'  won- 
derful acuteness,"  has  not  been  able  to  produce  any  one 
objection  to  the  apostolic,  and  therefore  divine  institution 
of  Episcopacy,  which  had  not  been  started  by  others,  who 
preceded  him  in  the  same  field  of  controversy.^  Some  of 
their  arguments  he  has  indeed  clothed  with  a  new  dress, 
and  by  that  means  has  made  them  assume  somewhat  of  a 
different  form  and  appearance ;  but  in  substance  and  reality, 
we  shall  find  them  the  same  as  those  to  which  we  have  been 
always  accustomed,  with  the  exception  perhaps  of  one  pro- 
minent and  distinguishing  feature,  their  being  accompanied 
with  a  peculiar  boldness  of  assertion,  and  peremptory  mode 
of  decision,  which  certainly  give  no  addition  to  their  in- 
trinsic value,  or  to  their  effect  in  proving  the  truth  of  what 
is  thus  asserted. 

Such  then  being  the  nature  of  the  work  we  have  to  ex- 
amine, the  materials  of  which  have  been  furnished  by  other 
hands,  and  only  put  together  by  this  eminent  artist,  we 
need  only  look  back  to  the  accounts  of  those,  who  have  al- 
ready inspected  them,  and  see  what  opinion  was  given  of 
them  at  the  time  when  they  were  first  produced.  Since 
even  this  learned  and  strenuous  opposer  of  Episcopacy  has 

*  In  proof  of  this,  it  might  easily  be  shown,  how  much  he  has  bor- 
rowed, not  only  from  Blondel,  Salmasius,  and  other  foreigners,  but  also 
from  writers  in  the  English  language,  such  as  Cartroright,  Clarhon, 
Baxter,  Lord  King,  author  of  an  Enquiry  into  the  Constitution,  ij'c.  of  the 
primitive  Church  ;  and  from  his  own  countryman  Mr.  Anderson,  of  Dun- 
barton  against  Rhind,  to  whom  he  seems  to  have  been  particularly  in- 
debted for  some  of  his  most  violent  invectives  against  the  *'  High-church 
party,"  as  may  be  seen  in  the  dedication,  preface,  and  many  other  parts 
of  ^r.  Anderson's  work. 


Idi  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

been  able  to  say  nothing  that  is  new  against  it,  there  is  no 
reason  to  expect,  that  any  thing  new  should  be  said  in  its 
defence.  As  the  mode  of  attack  is  still  the  same,  the 
means  of  repelling  it  must  be  the  same  likewise :  And 
since  our  acute  and  ingenious  adversarj^  has  not  conde-* 
scended  to  strike  out  any  other  way  of  assailing  our  eccle-, 
siastical  constitution,  than  what  has  been  discovered  by 
those  that  went  before  him  with  the  same  hostile  view,  we 
must  be  content  to  follow  him  in  the  beaten  path,  which  so 
many  of  his  predecessors  have  trod,  though  perhaps  not  so 
capable  as  he,  of  giving  it  all  the  turnings  and  windings 
which  are  so  curiously  displayed  in  the  lectures  now  before 
us. 

It  is  proper  to  begin  the  observations,  which  we  have 
proposed  to  make  on  these  theological  lectures^  by  giving 
the  author's  o^vn  account  of  them.  "  I  intend,"  says  he, 
in  the  beginning  of  his  first  lecture,  "  that  the  subject  of 
the  present  and  some  succeeding  lectures,  shall  be  the  sa- 
cred history,  the  first  branch  of  the  theoretic  part  of  the 
theological  course  which  claims  the  attention  of  the  student* 
This  is  subdivided  into  two  parts :  the  first  comprehends 
the  events  which  preceded  the  Christian  aera ;  the  second, 
those  which  followed.  The  first,  in  a  looser  way  of  speak- 
ing, is  included  under  the  title  of  Jewish  history ;  the  se- 
cond is  what  is  commonly  denominated  church  history,  or 
ecclesiastic  history."  It  is  this  second  part  of  his  plan, 
with  which  we  are  more  immediately  concerned,  and  which 
he  introduces,  by  telling  us,  towards  the  conclusion  of  his 
second  lecture :  "  Now  indeed  was  formed  a  community 
of  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  which  was  called  his  church ;  a 
word  that  denotes  no  more  than  society  or  assembly,  and  is 
sometimes  used  in  the  New  Testament,  with  evident  ana- 
logy to  the  common  use,  to  signify  the  whole  community 
of  Christians  considered  as  one  body,  of  which  Christ  is 
denominated  the  Head;  and  sometimes  only  a  particular 
congregation  of  Christians.    In  this  general  society,  founded 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  109 

in  the  unity  of  their  faith,  their  hope,  their  love,  cemented^ 
as  it  were,  by  a  communion  or  joint  participation,  as  occa- 
sion offered,  in  religious  offices,  in  adoration,  in  baptism^ 
and  in  the  commemoration  of  the  sufferings  of  their  Lord, 
preserved  by  a  most  friendly  intercourse,  and  by  frequent 
instructions,  admonitions,  reproofs  when  necessarv-^^  and 
even  by  the  exclusion  of  those  who  had  violated  such 
powerful  and  solemn  engagements  j  in  all  this,  I  say,  there 
was  nothing  that  interfered  with  the  temporal  powers." 
And  we  are  ready  to  say  the  same,  because  Christ  himself 
assures  us,  that "  his  kingdom^'*  which  Dr.  Campbell  chooses 
to  call  "  the  Christian  commonwealth^  is  not  of  this  world," 
and,  therefore,  "  in  no  respect  calculated  to  interfere  with 
the  rights  of  princes,  or  afford  matter  of  umbrage  or  jea- 
lousy to  the  secular  powers."  But  when  we  are  told,  that 
*'  this  general  society  is  cemented  by  a  communion  or  joint 
participation  in  baptism^"*  we  are  at  a  loss  to  know  what 
is  meant  by  this  expression,  as  connected  with  what  fol- 
lows ;  since  there  is  surely  no  command  in  scripture,  en- 
joining the  disciples  of  Jesus  to  partake  jointly^  as  occasion 
offers^  in  baptism^  although  they  are  expressly  commanded 
to  partake  jointly  in  what  is  here  called,  "  the  commemor 
ration  of  the  sufferings  of  their  Lord."  We  are  certain, 
that  baptism  is  the  only  means  whereby  members  can  be 
admitted  into  this  society ;  but  we  have  never  learned,  that 
a  set  of  unbaptized  persons,  even  though  united  in  the  be- 
lief of  the  gospel,  have  any  authority  to  constitute  them- 
selves members  of  it,  by  baptizing  one  another,  which 
would  seem  to  be  the  Lecturer's  meaning,  in  the  passage 
which  we  are  now  considering. 

We  are  also  obliged  to  differ  from  him  very  widely,  with 
respect  to  what  is  called  the  Church;  which  word,  if  it 
denotes,  as  he  acknowledges,  a  society^  must  also  signify, 
not  a  casual  assembly^  or  even  a  meeting  of  persons  by 
"joltmtary  agreement  among  themselves ;  but,  as  the  deri- 
vation of  the  original  word  implies,  a  select  society,  or 


101  General  Defeme  of  Episcopacy] 

number  of  people,  called  or  selected,  by  some  person  or 
persons  having  authority  for  that  purpose :  And  as  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  is  declared  to  be  "  not  of  this  world," 
the  subjects  of  that  kingdom,  or  the  members  of  his  church, 
must  be  considered  as  called  out  of  or  froin  the  world; 
called  by  God  from  "  the  world  that  lieth  in  wickedness," 
that  "  having  delivered  them  from  the  power  of  darkness, 
he  may  translate  them  into  the  kingdom  of  his  dear  Son."* 
All  this  shows  the  nature  and  jurisdiction  of  the  church  of 
Christ  to  be  very  different  from  that  of  "  any  private  com- 
pany, like  a  knot  of  artists  or  philosophers,"  to  which  Dn 
Campbell  is  pleased  to  compare  the  society  founded  by  the 
Son  of  God  for  the  salvation  of  mankind :  a  comparison 
so  unworthy  of  being  brought  forward  on  such  an  occasion, 
and  so  unlikely  to  answer  any  good  end,  by  the  terms  in 
which  it  is  stated,  that  we  should  not  have  thought  it  de- 
serving the  smallest  notice,  if  it  were  not  evidently  intended 
to  introduce  an  inquiry  into  the  causes  of  that  woful  cor- 
ruption, which  soon  prevailed  among  Christians,  and  which, 
by  a  long  and  fanciful  chain  of  connection,  is  traced  to  the 
primitive  practice  of  referring  their  civil  differences  to  the 
arbitration  of  their  ministers. 

This  practice  is  considered  as  a  natural  consequence  of 
St.  Paul's  "  expostulation  with  the  Corinthians  on  the 
nature  and  dignity  of  their  Christian  vocation,  to  which  it 
would  be  much  more  suitable,  patiently  to  suffer  injuries, 
than  to  endeavour  to  obtain  redress,"  by  going  to  law  in  the 
heathen  courts.  But  lest  there  should  be  any  mistake  on 
this  point,  by  confounding  matters  of  civil  controversy  with 
injuries  of  a  more  criminal  nature,  our  Lecturer  takes  care 
to  inform  us,  that  not  only  "  such  private  offences,  but  also 
those  scandals  which  affected  the  whole  Christian  fraternity, 
were,"  in  the  apostolic  age,  "  judged  by  the  churchy  that  is, 
the  congregationJ'''    '■'•  Accordingly,"  he  says,t  "  the  judg- 

*  Col.  j.  13.  f  Lecture  iii. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  111 

itient,  which  Paul,  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  had  formed,  con- 
cerning the  incestuous  person,  he  enjoins  the  church,  to 
whom  his  epistle  is  directed,  that  is  (to  use  his  own  words 
for  an  explanation),  them  who  at  Corinth  are  sanctified  in 
Christ  Jesus,  called  to  be  saints,  to  pronounce  and  execute. 
And  in  his  second  epistle  to  the  same  church,*  he  says,  in 
reference  to  the  same  delinquent—"  Sufficient  to  such  a  man 
is  the  censure,  which  was  inflicted  by  many;"  virolu}-/  vXHovaf 
—by  the  community — and  (v,  10)  "  To  whom  ye  forgive 
any  thing,  addressing  himself  always  to  the  congregation^ 
I  forgive  also.  We  admit,  with  the  learned  Dodwell,']' 
that  in  the  censure  inflicted  on  the  incestuous  person,  the 
Christians  at  Corinth  were  but  the  executors  of  the  doom 
awarded  by  the  apostle.  Nor  does  any  one  question  the 
apostolic  authority  in  such  matters  over  both  the  flock  and 
the  pastors.  But  from  the  words  last  quoted,  it  is  evident, 
that  he  acknowledges^  at  the  same  time,  the  ordinary  power 
in  regard  to  discipline  lodged  in  the  congregation;  and  from 
the  confidence  he  had  in  the  discretion  and  integrity  of  the 
Corinthians,  he  promises  his  concurrence  in  what  they  shall 
think  proper  to  do.  '  To  whom  ye  forgive  any  thing,  I 
forgive  also.'  Now,  though  in  after  times  the  charge  of 
this  matter  also  came  to  be  devolved,  first  on  the  bishop 
and  presbyters,  and  afterwards  solely  on  the  bishop,  yet 
that  the  people  as  well  as  the  presbyters,  as  far  down,  at 
least,  as  to  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  retained  some 
share  in  the  decision  of  questions,  wherein  morals  were  im- 
mediately concerned,  is  manifest  from  Cyprian! s  letters  still 
extant.  In  his  time,  when  congregations  were  become 
very  numerous,  the  inquiry  and  deliberation  were  holden 
(perhaps  then  more  commodiously)  in  the  ecclesiastical  col- 
lege, called  the  presbytery^  consisting  of  the  bishop,  the 
presbyters,  and  the  deacons.  When  this  was  over,  the 
result  of  their  inquiry  and  consultations  was  reported  t«^> 

*  2  Ccr.  ii.  6.  |  De  jure  bicorum  sacerdotali.  c.  iii.  sec.  in. 


112  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

the  whole  congregatmi  belonging  to  that  churchy  who  were 
called  together  on  purpose,  in  order  to  obtain  their  appro- 
bation of  what  had  been  done,  and  their  consent  to  the  re- 
solution that  had  been  taken  ;  for  without  their  conseiit^  no 
judgment  could  regularly  be  put  in  execution." 

Such  is  the  surprising  account  given  of  this  matter  in 
Dr.  Campbell's  Lectures  i  and  such  the  light  in  which  his 
theological  students  were  taught  to  view  the  original  consti- 
tution and  discipline  of  the  Christian  cjiurch  !— Had  such 
an  account  been  given  by  one  of  our  modem  independents^ 
who  boast  of  their  congregational  churches,  as  the  only 
form  of  primitive  institution  ;  or  had  such  a  lecture  been 
read  in  the  society  for  propagating  the  gospel  at  home,  we 
should  have  considered  it,  however  ill  founded  and  erro- 
neous, as  perfectly  natural,  and  consistent  with  the  object 
and  end  of  these  independent  and  missionary  schemes.* 
But  how  shall  we  discover  or  allow  the  merit  of  any  such 
consistency  of  character,  where  we  see  a  man  of  acknow- 
ledged abilities,  and  holding  some  of  the  most  distin- 
guished offices  which  the  religious  establishment  of  this 
country  has  to  boast  of,  yet  supporting  and  recommending 
a  system  of  ecclesiastical  order  and  discipline,  almost  as 
different  from  that  which  is  established  in  Scotland,  as  it  is 
opposite  to  every  thing  of  the  kind  to  be  met  with  in  the 
primitive  church  ?  Have  not  the  friends  of  this  establish- 
ment too  much  reason  to  suspect  that  their  learned  Lecturer 
would  have  been  one  of  its  warmest  opponents,  had  not  his 
opposition  been  prevented  by  the  liberal  provision  which 
it  held  out  to  him,  and  the  preferments  ^vhich  he  so  long 
enjoyed  ? 

But  in  the  preceding  extract  from  his  third  lecture,  no 

*  We  have  heard,  that  Greville  JSwing,  and  the  Haldenites,  hold  Dr. 
Campbell's  Lectures  in  high  estimation.  They  have  also  been  much  ad- 
mired and  recommended  by  the  Monthly  and  Critical  Revi^^ers,  who,  in 
general,  are  not  considered  aa  very  friendly  either  to  primitive  truth  cz 
order. 


general  Defence  of  Episcopatyi  j  13 

singularity  of  opinion  strikes  us  more  forcibly  than  his 
strange  insinuation,  that  Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  was 
uo  more  but  the  pastor  of  a  single  congregation  ;  when  the 
keenest  adversaries  of  the  Episcopal  cause  have  been  oblig- 
ed to  acknowledge  that  he  was  undoubtedly  the  fixed  and 
permanent  moderator  of  a  presbytery^  which  contained  at 
kast  eight  congregations :  And  though  Dr.  Campbell  has 
jasserted  it,  as  a  thing  "  manifest  from  Cyprian's  Letters," 
that  in  his  time,  "  the  people^  as  well  as  the  presbyters,  re* 
tdned  some  share  in  the  decision  of  questions,  wherein 
morals  were  immediately  concerned,"  yet  he  has  not  fa- 
voured us  with  the  quotation  of  a  single  passage  to  prove 
the  truth  of  his  assertion ;  and  we  are  certain,  that  many 
passages  could  be  produced  to  evince  the  direct  contrary^ 
and  which  would  completely  overthrow  this  pretended 
jurisdiction  of  the  people. 

Such,  indeed,  was  the  remarkable  humility  and  conde- 
scension of  this  primitive  martyr,  the  venerable  bishop  of 
Carthage,  that  from  the  time  of  his  entering  on  his  Epis- 
copal office,  as  he  says  in  one  of  his  letters — "  he  had  resolv- 
ed to  do  nothing  in  the  public  affairs  of  the  church,  with- 
out the  advice  of  his  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  the  con- 
sent or  approbation  of  the  people  at  large."^    But,  that  tl'^ 
was  the  effect  of  his  own  free  and  voluntary  condescer^^"» 
and  what  he  was  not  bound  to  adhere  to,  if  he  s?^  gooa 
reason  for  acting  otherwise,  is  evident  from  va?^J  "^stan- 
ces of  his  future  conduct,  and  particularly  fro'^  ^"^  letters 
written  by  him,  on  the  subject  of  reconciling  those  who, 
by  sacrificing  to  idols,  during  the  Deciar  persecution,  had 
lapsed  or  fallen  from  the  communion  c^'the  church.   In  one 
of  these  letters,  he  threatens  his  vresbyters  and  deacons 
with  a  heavy  sentence,  if  they  should  dare  to  transgress  die 
rule,  or  order,  which  he  had  sent  them,  respecting  the  treat- 

•  Quando  priniordio  Episcopatus  mei  statuerim,  nihil  sine  consilio  ves- 
tro,  et  sine  consensu  plebis,  mea  privatim  sententia  gerere.    Ep.  xiv.  p.  o3. 

15 


114  Getter al  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

ment  of  these  unhappy  persons  in  his  absence.*  Let  any 
person  read  the  letters,  and  try  if  it  be  possible  to  reconcile 
thera  to  the  character  of  one,  who  was  nothing  more  than 
the  pastor  of  a  single  congregation,  or  to  discover  any 
thing  in  them  that  looks  like  an  acknowledgment  on  the 
writer's  part,  of  that  democratic  influence  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  church  discipline,  which  Dr.  Campbell  seems  so 
eager  to  support. 

But  we  need  not  wonder  at  his  making  Cyprian  no  more 
than  the  pastor  of  an  independent  congregation,  who  could 
do  nothing  "  without  their  consent,"  when  we  find  him 
endeavouring  to  press  St.  Paul  himself  into  the  same  ser- 
vice.    For  though  he  admits,  as  he  could  not  well  do  other- 
wise, that  the  Christians  at  Corinth  were  but  the  executors 
of  the  doom  "  awarded  by  the  apostle ;"  yet  he  thinks  it 
evident,  that  St.  Paul "  acknowledged  the  ordinary  power 
in  regard  to  discipline  lodged  in  the  congregation,"  because^ 
he  told  them-—'  To  whom  ye  forgive  any  thing,  I  forgive 
also ;'  thus  "  promising  his  concurrence  in  what  they  should 
judge  proper  to  do ;"  which  surely  implies,  that  without  his 
concurrence  in  this  affair,  they  could  do  nothing ;  and  that 
^11  their  power  of  judging  arose  from  the  authority,  which, 
^  this  instance,  and  for  particular  reasons,  he  was  pleased 
*°  uve  them.     And  so  he  tells  them — "  To  this  end  also 
did  1  .rj-ite,  that  I  might  know  the  proof  of  you,  whether 
ye  be  oot^j^^f  [^  ^11  things."t    Indeed,  the  language  which 

interea,  sj^js  immoderatus  et  prseceps,  sive  de  nostrh presbyterii; 
\ei  (liaconis,  sive  dt pgi-gg^jj^jg^  ausus  fuerit,  ante  sententiain  7iostra7n, 
communicare  cum  laps.,  a  cmmnunicatione  nostra  resecetur."  See  this 
subject  discussed  in  a  mo:,  satisfactory  manner,  by  Bishop  Sage,  In  his 
Principles  of  the  Cyprianlc  A^^     London,  1695. 

t  2  Cor.  ii.  9.  It  is  well  observed  by  the  Anti-Jacobin  Reviewer  of 
this  article,  that  "  to  whom  ye  forgive  any  thing,  I  forgive  also,"  is  cer- 
tamly  the  language  of  a  superior  to  inferiors,  who  have  no  power  either 
to  punish,  or  to  forgive,  but  what  they  derive  from  him :  It  is,  as  if  the 
king  had  said  to  the  viceroy  of  Ireland,  during  the  late  rebellion—"  I  en- 
trust you  with  the  amplest  powers  for  the  public  good:  such  of  the  rebels 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  1  lo 

the  apostle  uses,  through  the  whole  of  his  discussion  o 
this  awful  subject,  plainly  shows,  that  the  power  of  excom- 
municating the  obstinately  guilty,  or  re-admitting  the  peni- 
tent, rested  solely  in  himself.     For  "  I  told  you  before," 
says  he,  "  and  foretel  you  as  if  I  were  present  the  second 
time,  and  being  absent,  now  I  write  to  them,  which  here- 
tofore have  sinned,  and  to  all  other,  that  if  I  come  again,  I 
will  not  spare.''''    And  again — "  I  write  these  things,  being 
absent,  lest  being  present,  I  should  use  sharpiiess^  accord- 
ing to  the  power  which  the  Lord  hath  given  me  to  edif  cation^ 
and  not  to  destruction.^''^    Though  Dr.  Campbell  could  not 
but  perceive,  that  these  expressions  gave  little  countenance 
to  his  congregational^  or  independent  scheme,  yet  by  trans- 
lating the  words — V  fTnliixio.  uvlm  n  Wo  1«v  xXnowv — "  the  cen- 
sure  which  was  inflicted  by  the  community^''  instead  of — 
''  this  punishment  which  was  inflicted  of  many,"  he  would 
seem  to  insinuate,  that  the  incestuous  person  was  excom- 
municated by  a  vote  of  the  congregation ;  when  the  fact  was, 
that,  without  referring  the  matter  at  all  to  them,  St.  Paul 
himself  had  passed  the  sentence,  as  he  tells  us  in  these 
words — "  I  verily  as  absent  in  body,  but  present  in  spirit, 
have  judged  already,  as  though  I  were  present,  concerning 
him,  that  hath  so  done  this  deed ;  in  the  name  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  when  ye  are  gathered  together,  and  my  spirit, 
with  the  power  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  deliver  such 
a  one  unto  Satan,  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh,  that  the 
spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus."t    The 
apostle  then  proceeds  to  show,  what  should  be  the  effect  of 
this  sentence,  by  enjoining  those  to  whom  he  wrote,   to 
''  put  away  from  among  them  the  excommunicated  person, 
not  to  keep  company  with  him,  and  with  such  an  one,  no 
not  to  eat  j"  which  abhorrence  of  his  company  and  conver- 

as  you  shall  forgive,  I  will  forgive  also."    But  will  any  man  say,  that  in 
ordinary  cases,  the  viceroy's  power,  in  consequence  of  such  a  speech,, 
■  would  have  been  considered  as  the  same  with  the  sovereign's? 
*  2  Cor.  xiii.  2,  10.  t  1  Cor.  v.  3,  4.  5, 


116  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

sation,  would  of  course  bring  him  into  public  disgrace^  and 
that  disgrace  was  the  punishment  which  the  Christian  peo- 
ple had  to  inflict,  in  consequence  of  their  apostle's  sen- 
tence. 

But  the  strain  of  declamation,  in  which  Dr.  Campbell 
indulges  on  this  subject,  seems  all  intended  to  afford  hirti 
an  opportunity,  not  only  of  giving  a  favourable  view  of  the 
discipline  of  his  own  church  ;  which,  unless  with  regard  to 
''  churches  and  manses,  and  some  other  things  of  little  mo- 
ment," he  considers  as  perhaps  the  most  unexceptionable 
now  to  be  met  with ;  but  also  of  representing  in  a  very  dif- 
ferent light,  "  the  polity  and  discipline"  of  the  church  of 
England,  which,  he  seems  to  think,  have  been.  "  devised^ 
for  the  express  purpose  of  rendering  the  clerical  character 
odious,  and  the  discipline  contemptible."  As  a  proof  of  this, 
he  tells  his  audience,  that  "  ecclesiastical  censures,  in  Eng- 
land, have  now  no  regard,  agreeably  to  their  original 
destination,  to  purity  and  manners  ;"  supposing,  no  doubt, 
that  his  presbyterian  students  would  never  look  into  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  of  the  Chureh  of  England^  wh^re, 
in  the  rubric  prefixed  to  the  communion  service,  and  which 
Was  made  a  part  of,  and  confirmed  by,  an  act  of  parlia- 
ment, the  minister  is  expressly  ordered  to  admit,  or  not  to 
admit  to  the  Lord's  table,  according  to  what  he  knows  of 
the  life  and  conversation  of  the  person  applying  for  admis- 
sion ;  and  in  case  of  "  repelling  any,"  he  is  "  obliged  to  give 
an  account  of  the  same  to  his  ordinary,  who  shall  proceed 
against  the  offending  person  according  to  the  canon." 
How  then  can  it  be  said,  that  such  "  ecclesiastical  censures 
have  no  regard  to  purity  and  manners  V  Yes — says  Dr. 
Campbell — -"  the  participation  of  one  of  the  sacraments 
having  been  with  them,  by  a  very  short-sighted  policy, 
perv^erted  into  a  test  for  civil  offices,  a  minister  may  be 
compelled  by  the  magistrate,  to  admit  a  man  who  is  well 
known  to  be  a  most  improper  person,  an   atheist,  bias- 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy;  \\t 

phemer,  or  profligate."^  The  history  of  this  test^  and  the 
causes  which  gave  rise  to  it,  and  still  operate  in  the  opinion 
of  the  legislature,  as  a  sufficient  ground  for  its  continuance, 
must  have  been  well  known  to  our  learned  professor  ;  who 
must  also  have  known,  had  he  but  taken  the  trouble  to  in-- 
quire,  that  no  such  compulsion  as  that  which  he  supposes^ 
35  ever  experienced  by  any  minister  of  the  church  of  Eng* 
land  ;t  3ttd  therefore  the  coarse  expression  might  have 
been  spared,  which  alludes  to  the  test^  as  "  a  coarse  im^ 
plement  of  human  authorit}^,  to  compel  a  thing  of  so  deli* 
cate  a  nature  as  true  religion."  The  coarseness  complained 
of  lies  not  in  the  implement,  but  in  the  disposition  of  those 
who  are  tempted  to  abuse,  or  apply  it  to  a  wrong  purpose  • 
and  such  temptations  will  always  occur,  \vhere  the  profess 
sion  of  religion  is  accompanied  with  those  worldly  advant- 
ages, which,  in  some  shape  or  other,  are  often  connected 
with  it,  even  when  embraced  in  its  greatest  purity. 

Having  observed  our  Lecturer  taking  so  much  pains  td 
convince  his  pupils,  that  the  discipline  of  his  own  thurch^ 
though  infinitely  preferable  to  that  of  the  church  of  Eng* 
land,  was  yet  far  short  of  the  pure  apostolic  model,  by 
which  the  congregational  or  independent  churches  are  dis*- 
tinguishedj   we  might  have   supposed^  that  any  farther 

•  Lecture  Ui. 

t  See  this  matter  very  fully  discussed  by  the  learned  Bishop  Sherlock, 
in  his  *  Arguments  against  the  repeal  of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts/ 
*'  The  test  act,"  says  that  able  prelate,  "  forces  no  clergyman  to  give  the 
sacrament  to  atheists  and  debauchees,  or  any  other  offenders,  if  they  be 
openly  and  notoriously  such :  and  if  they  are  such  only  in  secret,  they 
are  out  of  the  question  ;  for  no  clergyman's  conscience  can  be  burdened 
for  admitting  an  unknown  offender  to  the  sacrament.  If  a  clergyman 
proceed  virith  discretion  and  charity,  and  according  to  the  rules  prescribed 
him  by  authority,  he  has  as  little  to  fear  from  a  man  with  a  place,  as  from 
a  man  without  one;  and  if  he  be  unjustly  and  vexatiously  sued  for  doing 
his  duty,  the  law  will  give  him  costs." — Such  was  the  opinion  of  an 
English  prelate,  who,  in  regard  to  this  matter,  must  surely  have  known 
what  was  "  the  law  of  the  land,"  and  the  power  of  the  magistrate,  as 
well  as  any  Scotch  professor. 


118  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

inquiry  into  the  original  form  of  church  government,  was 
either  quite  unnecessary,  or  at  least  a  matter  of  so  little 
moment  as  not  to  require  any  long  or  serious  discussion. — 
For  if  it  be  true,  that  all  ecclesiastical  authority  is  derived 
from  the  people,  and  that  the  very  distinction  between 
clergy  and  laity,  has  its  only  foundation  in  the  will  and 
choice  of  the  Christian  community,  appointing  what  is 
proper  for  the  preservation  of  order  and  decency  in  their 
religious  assemblies  ;  in  that  case,  the  question,  whether 
the  persons  set  apart  in  the  apostolic  age  for  that  pur- 
pose, were  of  one,  or  two,  or  three  orders  ;  or  what  were 
the  powers  with  which  they  were  supposed  to  be  invested, 
is  so  frivolous  in  itself,  and  of  so  little  weight  in  the  scale 
of  our  duty  as  Christians,  as  hardly  to  require  or  merit 
the  slightest  examination.  Yet  trifling  as  it  must  have 
appeared  in  the  eyes  of  Dr.  Campbell,  and  of  such  of  his 
students  as  viewed  it  in  the  same  light  with  him,  he  obliged 
them  to  attend  to  it,  through  seven  of  his  lectures ;  "  the 
subject  of  which,"  he  told  them,  "  was  the  internal  polity 
of  the  church,  and  the  form  she  has  insensibly  assumed ; 
with  the  rules  of  subordination  which  have  obtained,  and 
in  many  places  do  still  obtain  in  the  different  orders." 

In  following  him  through  the  course  of  this  inquiry,  we 
are  presented  with  a  regular  chain  of  "  steps,  advancing 
from  presbytery  to  parochial  Episcopacy,  thence  to  prelacy 
or  diocesan  Episcopacy,  from  that  to  metropolitical  prir 
macy,  thence  again  to  patriarchal  superintendency,"  and 
landing  at  last  in  the  papal  supremacy.  The  first  three  of 
these  steps  are  all  with  which,  properly  speaking,  we  are 
concerned,  in  defending  our  own  ecclesiastical  polity  ;  and 
through  these  we  shall  endeavour  to  trace  his  progress, 
with  as  much  order  as  his  frequent  excursions  will  permit. 
Before  we  are  regularly  introduced  to  the  first  step  of  his 
course,  we  find  several  things  premised^  and  laid  down  for 
our  direction,  which,  as  I  observed  already,  would  seem 
to  render  quite  unnecessary  all  that  follows,  respecting  the 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  119 

different  forms  of  ecclesiastical  administration.  For  in  the 
most  unqualified  language,  we  are  plainly  told,  that  "  the 
terms  of  the  gospel  covenant  are  no  where,  in  the  sa- 
cred pages,  connected  with,  or  made  to  depend  on,  either 
the  minister,  or  the  form  of  the  ministry  ;"*  although  he 
had  just  before  quoted  our  Lord's  own  declaration  of  the 
terms  of  the  gospel  covenant  in  these  words — "  He  that 
believeth,  and  is  baptized^  shall  be  saved  ;"  which  surely 
implies  his  being  baptized  after  the  form  and  manner 
pointed  out  in  the  commission  which  Christ  gave  his 
aposdes,  at  the  very  time  when  he  made  this  declaration. 
If  baptism  then  must  be  considered  as  one  of  the  terms, 
or  conditions  of  salvation,  how  can  it  be  said  to  have  no 
dependence  on  the  minister,  or  no  connection  with  the 
form  of  his  ministry  ?  Are  we  to  understand  our  Lec- 
turer's words,  as  intended  to  teach  his  pupils,  that  our 
Lord's  apostles  acquired  no  particular  authority  from  the 
commission  which  he  gave  them,  for  making  all  nations 
his  disciples,  by  baptizing  them;  and  that  the  form  of  bap- 
tism laid  down  in  that  commission,  was  not  more  valid, 
or  more  necessary  to  be  observed,  than  any  other  form, 
which  might  be  adopted  for  the  same  purpose  ?  Then,  to 
be  sure,  the  original  form  of  government  in  the  church  is 
a  matter  of  no  consequence  ;  and  it  is  perfectly  ridiculous 
to  give  ourselves  any  trouble  in  inquiring,  or  reasoning 
about  it.  Every  one  that  pleases,  may  take  on  himself  the 
office  of  a  minister;  and  every  form  of  ministry  is  equally 
consistent  with  the  terms,  and  productive  of  the  benefits, 
of  the  gospel  covenant. 

The  same  inference  must  undoubtedly  be  drawn  from 
the  account  which  is  afterwards  given  of  the  apostolic 
commission,  where  we  are  told  by  this  learned  explainer  of 
the  "  sacred  pages,"  that — "  the  first  order  given  to  the 
^^'leven  to  make  converts^  to  baptize^  and  to  teach^  can*ies 

*  Lectwre  iv. 


1^0  General  Defence  qf  Episcopacy^ 

in  it  nothing  from  which  we  can  discover,  that  it  was  a 
commission  entrusted  to  them  exclusively  as  aposdes  or 
ministers,  and  not  given  them  also  as  Christians  ;  and  that 
the  apostles  were  particularized,  because  best  qualified^ 
froni  their  long  attendance  on  Christ's  ministr}'^,  for  pro- 
moting his  religion  in  the  world ;  but  not  with  a  view  to 
exclude  any  Christians,  who  were  capable,  from  co-operat- 
ing with  them  in  the  same  good  cause."*  We  had  just 
before  been  told  of  a  "  similitude  taken  from  temporal 
things,"  for  the  better  illustration  of  this  dark  and  difficult 
subject;  and  by  the  help  of  a  little  freedom  of  the  same 
kind,  in  which,  we  hope,  there  is  no  harm,  we  now  dis- 
cover, that  Dr.  Campbell's  so  long  possessing  the  theolo'- 
gical  chair  in  Marischal  College,  and  instructing  his  pupils 
in  the  knowledge  of  sound  divinity,  was  not  in  consequence 
of  his  having  received  any  commission  or  authority  for  that 
purpose,  but  merely  because  he  was  "  best  qualified"  for 
discharging  the  duties  of  the  office,  and  none  else  were 
'^  capable  of  co-operating  with  him  in  the  same  good 
cause."t 

*  Lecture  iv. 

t  This  point  is  well  illustrated  by  another  "  similitude,"  which  the 
Anti-Jacobin  Reviewer  of  Dr.  Campbell's  work  thus  happily  makes  use. 
of,  •  It  is  not  probable,  that  his  Majesty's  commission  to  the  president 
of  the  supreme  court  of  law  in  Scotland,  expressly  prohibits  all  other  law- 
yers from  executing  that  office,  to  which  it  appoints  him;  and  it  is  cer- 
tainly not  improbable,  that  there  are  many  lawyers  at  the  Scotch  bar 
perfectly  well  qualified  to  preside  over  any  court  of  law  in  thai  part  of 
the  united  kingdom.  Yet  what  would  Dr.  Campbell  have  thought  of 
the  man,  who,  having  formed  opinions  of  the  constitution  of  courts  of 
Jaw,  similar  to  those  which  he  had  himself  formed  of  the  constitution  of 
the  Christian  church,  should  have  said—"  There  is  nothing  in  the  com- 
mission given  to  the  president  of  the  court  of  session,  from  which  we  can 
discover  that  it  is  a  commission  entrusted  to  him  exclusively,  as  a 
Judge,  and  not  given  to  him  also  as  a  lawyer ;  and  that  he  is  particu- 
larized in  it,  only  because  he  is  best  qualified  for  discharging  the  duties 
of  the  office,  but  not  with  a  view  to  exclude  any  lawyer  who  is  capable, 
from  occasionally  taking  possession  of  his  chair,  and  presiding  with 
autlioritv  over  the  court  ?" 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  121 

But  that  the  opinion  which  led  to  this  similitude  was 
the  "  construction  put  upon  the  apostolic  charge,  in  the 
days  of  the  apostles,"  we  are  told,  "  appears  not  impro- 
bable, from  the  subsequent  part  of  the  scripture  history ; 
for  Philip  the  deacon  baptized  the  Ethiopian  eunuch;  Peter 
trusted  the  charge  of  baptizing  Cornelius  and  his  family^ 
to  the  Christian  brethren  who  attended  him ;  Ananias,  a 
disciple,  was  employed  to  baptize  Paul ;  and  Paul  says  of 
himself,  that  Christ  sent  him  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach 
the  gospel." 

With  respect  to  the  first  of  these  instances,  it  is  said, 
that  "  Philip,  though  no  apostle,  and  probably  at  that  time 
no  more  than  a  deacon,  (that  is,  a  trustee  for  the  poor  in 
matters  purely  secular)  did  all  to  the  Ethiopian  eunuch, 
which  the  apostles  had  in  charge  with  regard  to  all  nations. 
He  converted,  baptized,  and  taught  him."  And  so  he  well 
inight,  when  the  "  angel  of  the  Lord"  had  sent  him  on  the 
journey,  which  led  to  this  conversion,  and  the  "  spirit" 
directed  him  how  to  proceed  in  it.  Our  Lecturer  takes  no 
notice  of  this  circumstance,  or  of  the  account  which  is 
given  of  the  appointment  of  the  seven  deacons ;  who, 
though  men  "  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  were  yet  solemnly 
«rdained  by  prayer,  and  the  laying  on  of  the  apostles' 
hands ;  which  evidently  shows,  that  this  same  deacon,  or 
*'  trustee  for  the  poor,"  as  he  is  here  called  for  the  sake 
of  lessening  his  sacred  character,  was  something  more, 
evai  in  office,  than  those,  who  are  thought  to  supply  the 
place  of  deacons  under  the  Scotch  establishment ;  and  being 
also  directed  by  an  immediate  vision,  or  inspiration  from 
heaven,  was  sufficiendy  warranted  in  all  that  he  did  for  the 
benefit  of  his  Ethiopian  convert. 

A  second  instance  produced  from  scripture  in  support  of 
our  author's  opinion,  respecting  the  nature  of  the  apostolic 
commission,  is  the  relation  of  what  happened,  "when 
Peter  was  sent  to  open  the  door  of  faith  to  the  Gentiles,  by 
the  conversion  of  Cornelius  and  his  family."    To  prepare 

16 


122  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  ^ 

the  way  for  that  merciful  event,  an  angel  of  God  was  3€nt 
to  the  devout  centurion,  not  to  instruct  him  directly  in  the 
faith  of  Christ,  but  to  inform  him  of  one,  who  "  should 
tell  him  what  he  ought  to  do."  This  necessary  knowledge 
of  his  duty  was  to  be  obtained,  not  from  the  first  well-in- 
formed Christian,  who  could  be  found  to  impart  it^  but 
from  an  apostle  of  Christy  who  was  to  be  brought  from  a 
considerable  distance  for  that  purpose :  which  clearly 
shows,  that  the  commission,  in  virtue  of  which  the  apos- 
tles acted,  was  so  "  exclusively  entrusted  to  them  as  apos- 
tles," that  not  even  an  angel  from  heaven  was  allowed  to 
intermeddle  with  any  thing  that  belonged  to  it.  An  apos- 
tle, therefore,  having  been  sent  for  ;  having  come  to  Corne- 
lius, and  having  found,  that  "  on  all  those  in  his  house, 
who  heard  the  word,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  had  been 
poured  out"  in  a  most  wonderful  and  conspicuous  manner, 
he  naturally  puts  this  question  to  "  the  six  brethren  who 
accompanied  him," — '-'■  Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that 
these  should  not  be  baptized,  which  have  received  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  well  as  we  ?"  And  then  we  read,  that  "  he  com- 
manded them  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lordj"^ 
that  is,  he  gave  authority  to  those  that  were  with  him  to 
administer  the  sacrament  of  baptism ;  and  surely  no  person 
can  doubt  his  right  to  delegate  such  authority,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  commission  which  he  himself  had  received 
from  Christ  for  that  very  purpose.  When  all  these  cir- 
cumstances are  duly  considered, — the  previous  falling  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  upon  these  first  fruits  of  the  Gentiles,- — 
the  presence  of  an  apostle, — the  attendance  of  certain ' 
brethren;  an  apostolic  command  empowering  these  brethren 
to  baptize  the  converted  family;  it  is  hardly  possible  to  con- 
ceive a  train  of  facts  more  directly  contrary  to  the  popular 
claim  set  up  by  Dr.  Campbell,  than  what  appears  in  the 
history  of  the  conversion  of  Cornehus,  and  the  means  by 

♦  Acts  X.  47,  48. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  1 23 

which  he  and  his  family  were  received  into  the  church  of 
Christ. 

What  is  said  of  "  Ananias,  a  disciple,  being  employed 
to  baptize  Paul,"  is  as  litde  to  the  purpose  for  which  it  is 
brought  forward,  since  we  know  not  of  what  rank  in  the 
church  this  disciple  was,  and  the  apostles  themselves  are 
frequently  called  disciples ;  neither  is  it  positively  said,  that 
Ananias  baptized  Paul,  any  more  than  that  Peter  baptized 
Cornelius.  And  if  Ananias'  saying  to  Paul,  "  Arise  and 
be  baptized,"  proves  that  in  consequence  of  this  command 
Paul  received  baptism  from  his  hands,  it  may  with  equal 
reason  be  inferred,  that  Peter's  commanding  Cornelius  to 
be  baptized,  proves  the  office  to  have  been  performed  by 
the  apostle.  In  both  cases,  however,  there  was  a  direct 
communication  from  heaven  ;  and  when  Ananias  acted  un- 
der divine  influence,  and  according  to  what  "  the  Lord  said 
to  him  in  a  vision,"  we  cannot  doubt  of  his  having  sufficient 
authority  for  what  he  did,  whether  he  was  ordained  or  not 
by  the  hands  of  men  ;  and  from  all  that  the  sacred  historian 
tells  us  of  him,  no  man  can  say,  that  he  was  not  so  ordained. 
Even  from  our  Lecturer's  own  words — "  Ananias,  a  dis- 
ciple, was  employed  to  baptize  Paul,"  it  may  be  justly  con- 
cluded, that  the  disciple  was  duly  authorized  by  his  blaster 
and  Employer:  And  a  similar  inference  may  be  drawn 
from  what  Dr.  Campbell  acknowledges  of  St.  Paul's  "  say- 
ing himself  of  his  own  mission,  that  Christ  se7it  him  not 
tc  baptize,  but  to  preach  the  gospel ;"  which  clearly  shows, 
that,  since  we  are  certain  he  did  baptize,  as  well  as  preachy 
it  was  the  apostle's  own  opinion,  that  he  could  not  regu- 
larly do  either  the  one  or  the  other  without  being  sent. 

In  all  these  instances,^  produced  from  the  scripture 

*  The  same  instances,  and  the  same  arguments  founded  upon  them, 
were  produced  some  years  ago,  for  a  similar  purpose,  by  another  mi- 
nister of  the  Scotch  establishment,  in  a  work,  entitled — Ari  Inquiry  into  the 
Powers  of  Ecclesiastics,  isfc.  and  which  was  taken  due  notice  of  at  the 
vinae  of  its  publication. 


J  24  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

history,  we  have  now  seen  what  ground  there  is  for  the 
construction  which  our  author  wishes  to  show  was  put 
tipon  the  apostoHc  charge,  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  and 
particularly  what  was  then  the  opinion  of  Christians,  with 
respect  to  the  power  of  baptizing^  '*  which,"  he  says, 
*'  compared  with  preaching,  though  a  part,  was  but  an  in- 
ferior and  subordinate  part  of  an  apostle's  charge."  Yet 
was  it  particularly  specified  in  the  apostolic  commission, 
and  pointed  out  as  the  instituted  means,  whereby  the  con- 
verted nations  were  to  be  brought  to  Christ,  and  entered 
into  his  school,  for  the  purpose  of  being  "  taught  to  ob- 
serve ail  things  whatsoever  he  had  commanded." — How 
then  can  it  be  thought,  that  the  administration  of  baptism 
was  not  an  essential  part  of  the  commission  given  to  the 
apostles,  and  given  to  them  exclusively,  not  as  Christians, 
but  as  apostles,  persons  "  sent  by  Christ,  even  as  the  Father 
had  sent  him,"  with  power  to  provide  for  the  regular  trans- 
inis&ion  of  the  same  authority  to  ''^preach  and  baptizcy  even 
Unto  the  end  of  the  world  ?" 

Indeed,  our  Lecturer  seems  to  have  been  aware  of  his 
having  gone  too  far,  in  giving  such  a  degrading  account  of 
baptism,  and  in  assigning  such  unlimited  power  to  the 
*•'  community  at  large,"  for  the  administration  of  it ;  and, 
therefore,  he  adds  a  sort  of  caution  against  any  improper 
inference  that  might  be  drawn  from  what  he  had  said  on 
the  subject,  by  telling  us,  that  "  nothing  here  advanced  can 
justly  be  understood  to  combat  the  propriety  of  limiting, 
for  the  sake  of  discipline,  the  power  of  baptizing  to  fewer 
hands,  than  that  of  preaching,  when  once  a  fixed  ministry 
5  s  settled  in  a  church,  and  regulations  are  adopted  for  its 
government." — But  if  it  be  true,  as  he  had  said  before, 
that  "  the  first  order  given  to  the  eleven  to  baptize^  was 
with  no  view  of  excluding  any  Christians,  who  were  capable, 
from  co-operating  with  them  ;"  who  are  they  that  could 
afterwards  pretend  to  alter  that  order,  or  make  an  exclusion^ 
where  none  was  intended  ?   If  Christ  himself  allowed,  and 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  125 

gave  his  apostles  authority  to  permit,  the  promiscuous 
liberty  of  baptizing  to  2X1  Christians,  wIk)  were  capable  of 
using  it;  who  but  these  apostles,  as  acting  for  Christ,  could 
with  any  "  propriety  limit"  the  general  power,  with  which 
he  had  thus  indulged  all  his  capable  disciples?  If  Dr. 
Campbell's  presbytery^  as  succeeding  to  the  apostles,  or 
rather  coming  after  them,  (for  stricdy  speaking,  he  allows 
tliem  no  successors)  did  for  the  sake  of  discipline,  consider 
such  a  limitation  proper,  and  make  it  accordingly ;  was  not 
this  as  flagrant  an  encroachment  upon  the  "  rights"  of  the 
people  made  over  to  them  by  Christ,  as  what  he  so  bitterly 
complains  of  in  the  diocesan  bishops,  when  they  began  to 
limit  the  powers,  and  encroach  upon  the  rights  of  their 
brethren  presbyters?  It  might  also  be  asked,  who  they 
Were,  that  could  take  upon  them  to  "  settle  a  fixed  ministry 
in  a  church,"  different  from  that  which  the  apostles  had 
settled ;  or  were  entitled  to  appoint  "  regulations  to  be 
adopted  for  its  government,"  if  all  "  capable  Christians" 
had  an  equal  right  to  share  in  that  government^  and  none 
Were  set  apart  for  judging  of  their  brethren's  capacities  ? 

These  are  questions  which  our  Professor  well  knew  it 
Would  be  difficult  to  answer  ;  and  conscious,  as  it  were,  of 
the  necessity  of  sheltering,  under  something  like  primitive 
authority,  what  he  had  advanced,  respecting  the  right  of 
private  Christians  to  exercise  those  offices,  which  have  long 
been  considered  as  peculiar  to  a  public  ministry,  he  tells  us 
*— <*"  The  doctrine  I  have  been  illustrating,  so  far  from 
being,  as  some  Romanists  ignorantly  pretend,  one  of  the 
many  novelties  sprimg  from  the  protestant  schism,  was 
openly  maintained  at  Rome  without  censure,  about  the 
middle  of  the  fourth  century,  by  Hilary,  a  deacon  of  that 
church,  a  man  of  erudition  and  discernment ;  whose  opinion, 
it  seems,  as  here  represented,  was,  that,  "  at  first,  for  the 
Increase  of  converts,  it  was  aUowed  to  all  without  distinc- 

*  Lectiue  iv. 


126  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy <> 

tion,  to  preacli,  to  baptize,  and  to  explain  the  scriptures  in 
the  church."*  Such  is  the  doctrine  which  this  author  is 
made  to  teach  by  giving  a  few  extracts  from  his  exposition 
of  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Ephesians ;  in 
which,  finding  a  number  of  church  officers  mentioned  by 
St.  Paul,  as  having  been  given  by  Christ  for  the  work  of 
the  ministry,  he  wished  to  make  it  appear,  that  even  in  his 
time,  they  were  all  retained,  though  under  different  names: 
and  as  the  practice  then  was  to  administer  baptism  only  on 
certain  days,  and  at  stated  seasons,  we  can  easily  discover 
what  this  "  man  of  erudition  and  discernment"  means, 
when  he  says — that  "  at  first — all  taught,  and  all  baptized, 
whenever  occasion  called,  without  any  distinction  of  days 

*  The  words  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell  from  the  commentary  of  Hilary, 
who  is  usually  called  the  Pseudo-Ambrose,  and  which  had  been  quoted  by 
Mr.  Anderson,  of  Dunbarton,  for  the  same  purpose,  are  these — "  Post- 
quam  omnibus  locis,  ecclesiae  sunt  constitutae,  et  officia  ordinata,  aliter 
composita  res  est  quam  coeperat ;  primum  enim  omnes  docebant,  et  omnes 
baptizabant,  quibuscunque  diebus  vel  temporibus  fuisset  occasio."  A 
little  after,  "  Neque  Petrus  diaconos  habuit,  quando  Cornelium,  cum  omni 
domo  ejus  baptizavit;  nee  ipse,  sed  jussit  fratribus  qui  cum  illo  ierant  ad 
Cornelium  ab  Joppe."  Again ;  "  Ut  ergo  cresceret  plebs,  et  multiplicaretur,. 
omnibus  inter  initia  concessum  est,  et  evangelizare,  et  baptizare,  et  scrip- 
turas  in  ecclesia  explanare."  Such,  we  are  told,  "  were  the  sentiments 
of  a  respectable  member  of  the  Roman  presbytery  in  those  days ;"  but 
we  are  not  told,  what  was  more  certain,  that  this  same  Hilary  aittached 
himself  to  one  of  the  most  violent  men  of  those  days,  Lucifer  of  Cagliari, 
and  was  so  far  from  giving  any  countenance  to  the  opinion,  that  all 
Christians  had  a  right  to  administer  the  sacraments,  that  he  zealously 
contended  for  the  necessity  of  re-baptizing  heretics,  and  all  those  whose 
baptism  had  been  in  any  respect  irregular ;  on  which  account,  his  con- 
temporary Jerome  sarcastically  called  him — the  Deucalion  of  the  ivorld. 
All  this,  Dr.  Campbell  might  have  mentioned  to  his  pupils,  and  should 
also  have  added,  what  immediately  follows  his  last  quotation,  in  these 
words—"  Ubi  autem  omnia  loca  circumplexa  est  ecclesia,  conventicula 
constituta  sunt,  et  rectores,  et  coetera  officia  in  ecclesia  ordinata  sunt,  ut 
iiullus  de  clero  auderet,  qui  ordinatus  7ion  esset,  prsesumere  officium  quod 
sciret  non  sibi  creditum  vel  concessum ;  et  coepit  alio  ordine  et  provi- 
dentia  gubernari  ecclesia,  quia  si  omnes  eadem  possent,  irrationabile  esset, 
et  vulgaris  res  et  vilissima  videretur." 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  127 

ov  seiisons."  For  by  this  observation,  as  connected  with 
what  goes  before,  and  follows  it,  we  are  not  to  understand, 
that  the  sacrament  of  baptism  was,  at  the  beginning,  admi- 
nistered by  all  Christians  indiscriminately,  but  only  that  the 
writer  of  this  account  thought  it  was  then  administered,  as 
occasion  required,  by  all  those,  to  whom  he  had  been  allud- 
ing, the  apostles^  prophets^  evangelists^  paators  and  teachers^ 
who  St.  Paul  had  said,  ''  were  given  by  the  Lord,  for  the 
perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  for 
the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ."  Whether  Hilary  was 
right  or  wrong,  in  supposing  that  those  who  were  thus 
given  for  the  service  of  the  church,  were  called  to  it  by 
the  immediate  impulse  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  not  or- 
dained by  men,  we  need  not  stop  to  inquire,  since,  if  the 
case  really  was  so,  there  could  be  no  doubt  of  their  having 
sufficient  authority  for  what  they  did,  and  no  danger  that 
what  was  done  by  them  would  not  be  deemed  regular  and 
valid  by  those  who  knew  them  to  be  acting  under  such 
divine  influence. 

Not  satisfied,  however,  with  resting  the  truth  of  his 
opinion  on  the  authority  of  his  favourite  Hilar}',  which  we 
see  affords  it  at  best  but  a  very  weak  and  questionable  sup- 
port, our  Lecturer  appeals  next  to  the  testimony  of  a  wri- 
ter a  littlemore  ancient,  and  whom  he  treats  in  the  same 
way  as  he  had  treated  his  "  respectable  member  of  the 
Roman  presbytery,"  by  detaching  a  sentence  or  two,  with- 
out giving  the  whole  of  the  argument  to  which  they  refer. 
This  ,  writer  is  TertuUian,  who,  in  his  Exhortation  to 
Chastity^  inveighing  against  second  marriages,  and  having 
proved,  as  he  thought,  that  they  were  prohibited  to  the 
clergy,  makes  use  of  this  argument  for  extending  the  pro- 
hibition to  the  laity,  that  the  distinction  which  prevailed  in 
his  day  between  the  priesthood  and  the  people,  must  have 
been  only  of  the  church's  making ;  for,  says  he,  "  where 
there  is  no  meeting  of  the  ecclesiastical  order,  thou  offerest 
and  bapdzest,  and  art  single  a  priest  to  thyself.    But  three 


128  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

persons,  though  laymen,,  make  a  church,"^  as  Dr.  Camp- 
bell renders  this  last  sentence,  and  then  adds — "  It  matters 
nothing  to  the  present  question,  that  his  doctrine  of  the 
unla\vfulness  of  second  marriages  is  unreasonable;  it  mat- 
ters nothing  that  his  argument  is  inconclusive ;  we  are  con- 
cerned only  with  the  fact,  to  which  he  refers  as  notorious;" 
—whereas  the  truth  is,  that  instead  of  being  2ifact  at  all,  it 
is  merely  an  inference  drawn  from  very  absurd  premises,  to 
serve  a  particular  purpose,  and  by  the  same  author,  who  in 
his  Book  on  Baptism^  in  answer  to  the  question— Who  may 
baptize  ?  says — "  The  chief  priest,  who  is  the  bishop,  has 
the  right  of  giving  baptism,  and  after  him  the  presbyters 
and  deacons,  but  not  without  the  bishop's  authority."t  In 
these  words,  it  is  plainly  laid  down,  we  might  say,  as  "  a 
notorious  fact,"  not  only,  that  there  were  these  three  orders 
in  the  church,  of  which  the  bishop  was  the  chief,  but  also 
that  even  deacons  or  presbyters  could  not  baptize,  or  of  con- 
sequence perform  any  other  ministerial  acts,  but  by  autho- 
rity derived  from  him.  The  same  author,  in  his  Prescrip- 
tions against  Heretics^  says — "  Among  them  a  bishop  to- 
day is  not  so  to-morrow;  a  deacon  to-day  is  a  reader  to- 
morrow ;  to-day  a  presbyter,  a  layman  to-morrow ;  for 
they  enjoin  priestly  offices  even  upon  laymen :"{  thus  point- 
ing out  as  one  of  the  grossest  irregulai'ities  prevalent  among 
these  heretics,  what  Dr.  Campbell  wishes  to  represent  as  a 
duty,  which  every  private  Christian,  if  capable,  is  bound  to 
perform. 

But  of  all  the  strange  things  advanced  in  this  fourth 
lecture  now  under  our  consideration,  that  which  must  excite 


*  TertuHian's  words  are — "  Adco  ubi  ecclesiastici  ordinis  non  est  con- 
sessus,  et  offers,  et  tinguis,  et  sacerdos  tibi  solus.  Sed  ubi  tres,  ecclesia 
est,  licit  laici." 

t  His  words  are — "  Dandi  quidem  jus  habet  summus  sacerdos,  qui  est 
Episcopus,  dehinc  presbyteri  et  diaconi,  non  tamen  sine  Episcopi  auctori- 
ta'^e." 

\.  "  Namet  laicis  saterdolalia  munera  injangunt."  . 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  129 

the  greatest  degree  of  surprise,  is  his  attempt  to  represent 
the  congregational  scheme  of  ecclesiastical  polity,  which 
he  is  so  anxious  to  defend,  as  "  conformable  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  church  of  England."^  In  proof  of  this  agree- 
ment, he  brings  forward  the  latter  part  of  her  twenty-third 
article,  entituled — Of  ministering  in  the  Congregation ; 
where  it  is  said — "  those  we  ought  to  judge  lawfully  called 
and  sent,  which  be  chosen,  and  called  to  this  work,  by 
men,  who  have  public  authority  given  unto  them  in  the 
congregation,  to  call  and  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's 
vineyard.  This,"  he  says,  "  if  it  mean  anv  thing,  and  be 
not  a  mere  identical  proposition,  of  which,  I  own,  it  has 
some  appearance,  refers  us  ultimately  to  that  authority, 
however  modelled^  which  satisfies  the  people^  and  is  settled 
among  them,'^'*  It  is  but  fair,  however,  notwithstanding  this 
ingenious  and  polite  remark,  to  let  the  church  of  England 
speak  for  herself,  as  most  likely  to  be  the  best  interpreter 
of  her  own  ineaning.  And  if  we  turn  to  her  thirty-sixth 
article,  which  our  Lecturer  has  kept  out  of  sight,  because 
there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  what  it  means^  we  find  her  there 
declaring,  that — *'  the  book  of  consecration  of  archbishops 
and  bishops,  and  ordering  of  priests  and  deacons,  lately 
set  forth  in  the  time  of  Edward  the  VI.  and  confirmed  at 
the  same  time  by  authority  of  parliament,  doth  contain  all 
things  necessary  to  such  consecration  and  ordering;  neither 
has  it  any  thing  that  of  itself  is  superstitious  and  ungodly. 
And,  therefore,  whosoever  are,  or  shall  be  consecrated 
or  ordered  according  to  the  rites  of  that  book,  we  decree 
all  such  to  be  rightly,  orderly  and  lawfully  consecrated  and 
ordered." 

Now,  the  preface  to  that  book,  thus  confirmed  and  sanc- 
tioned, (and  wKich  preface  is  as  much  a  part  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  church  of  England  as  the  thirty-nine  articles])'  runs 
in  these  terms,  so  plain,  that  they  cannot  be  mistaken. 

*  Lecture  iv. 
17 


'130  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy o 

*'  It  is  evident  unto  all  men,  diligently  reading  holy 
scripture,  and  ancient  authors,  that  from  the  apostles'  time 
there  have  been  these  orders  of  ministers  in  Christ's  church, 
bishops^  priests  and  deacons:  Which  offices  were  evermore 
had  in  such  reverend  estimation,  that  no  man  might  pre- 
sume to  execute  any  of  them  except  he  were  first  called, 
tried,  examined,  and  known  to  have  such  qualities  as  were 
requisite  for  the  same ;  and  also  by  public  prayer,  with 
imposition  of  hands^  were  approved,  and  admitted  thereunto 
by  lawful  authority*  And,  therefore,  to  the  intent  that 
these  orders  may  be  continued,  and  reverently  used  and 
esteemed  in  the  church  of  England,  no  man  shall  be  ac- 
counted, or  taken  to  be  a  lawful  bishops  priest  or  deacon  in 
the  church  of  England,  or  suffered  to  execute  any  of  the 
said  functions^  except  he  be  called,  tried,  examined,  and 
admitted  thereunto,  according  to  the  form  hereafter  follow- 
ing^ or  hath  had  formerly  Episcopal  co7isecratio7i  or  oi'dina- 
tion*^  Had  Dr.  Campbell  introduced  into  his  lecture  this 
preface^  as  well  as  her  twenty-third  article^  he  could  not 
have  easily  brought  his  pupils  to  believe,  even  on  his  word, 
that  the  church  of  England  "  has  not  presumed  to  delineate 
the  essentials  of  a  Christian  ministiy,  or  to  say  any  thing 
which  could  be  construed  to  exclude  those  who  are  go- 
verned in  a  different  manner  from  that  in  which  she  herself 
is  governed."* 

It  was  equally  unfair  in  the  learned  Professor,  not  to  tell 
his  youthful  audience,  in  explaining  to  them  the  doctrine  of 
the  church  of  England,  that  at  the  time  when  her  thirty- 
nine  articles  were  drawn  up,  the  word  congregation  made 
use  of  in  the  tzventy-third  article  had  precisely  the  same  sig- 
nification as  the  word  church,  and  was  used  with  the  same 

*  See  Lecture  iv.  where  Dr.  Campbell  has  evidently  borrowed  from 
Mr.  Anderson,  of  Dunbarton,  who  affirms — "that  the  19th  and  23d  articles 
of  the  church  of  England  are  conceived  in  such  general  words,  on  pur- 
pose that  tbey  might  not  be  thought  to  exclude  other  churches  that  differ  from 
tfjem  in  point  of  government."    Page  38  of  the  work  ahead/  mentioned. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  131 

latitude.  Indeed,  the  two  terms  were  at  that  time  considered 
so  perfectly  synonymous,  that  in  the  translation  of  the  bible 
then  used,  Christ  is  called  the  "  Head  of  the  congregation^ 
which  is  his  body ;"  and  is  mentioned  as  saying  to  Peter-— 
"  On  this  rock  I  will  build  my  congregation,'*''  To  the  same 
purpose  we  are  told,  that  forty  years  after  the  drawing  up  of 
the  thirty-nine  articles,  the  word  congregation  was  used  in 
the  canonical  prayer  before  sermons,  lectures  and  homilies, 
in  which  they  were  directed  "  to  pray  for  the  whole  congre- 
gation  of  Christian  people  dispersed  throughout  the  whole 
world."^  Hence  it  is  evident,  that  the  meaning  of  the  ar- 
ticle in  question  is  plainly  this — '*  It  is  not  lawful,"  that  is 
- — by  the  law  of  God^  for  "  any  man  to  take  upon  him  the 
office  of  public  preaching  or  ministering  the  sacraments  in 
the  congregation,"  or  '-'•  church  of  Christy  before  he  be  thus 
lawfully  called  and  sent  to  execute  the  same.  And  those  we 
ought  to  judge  lawfully  called  and  sent,"  according  to  the 
laxv  of  God^  which  be  chosen  "  and  called  to  this  work,  by 
men  who  have  thus  public  authority  given  unto  them  in  the 
congregation,"  or  church  of  Christy  "to  call  and  send  mi- 
nisters into  the  Lord's  vineyard."  The  lazofulness  of  such 
public  authority  must  mean  its  conformity  to  the  laws  of 
God^  because  the  bishops  and  clergy  assembled  in  convoca- 
tion, who  were  the  compilers  of  the  articles,  not  being  civil 
judges,  had  no  right  to  declare  what  was  lawful,  by  the  laws 
of  the  land,  or  any  temporal  statutes,  but  only  what  they 
deemed  to  be  lawful,  according  to  the  laws  of  God,  laid 
down  in  scripture  for  the  spiritual  government  of  his  church. 
And  as  the  twenty -third  article  is  sufficient  to  show  the  ne- 
cessity of  such  a  lawful  commission,  so  the  thirty-sixth  arti- 
cle plainly  declares  that  the  persons  invested  with  such  com- 
mission, are  the  bishops^  priests  and  deacons^  who  are  duly 
consecrated  and  ordered,  according  to  the  rites  of  the  book 
referred  to  in  that  article ;  and  in  which  book  the  church  of 

*  See  Brett's  Divine  Right  of  Episcopacy,  i^c. 


1 32  General  Defence  of  Episcopaaj* 

England,  by  her  prayers  to  Almighty  God,  acknowledges 
her  belief  that  every  one  of  these  orders  was  appointed  by 
his  Holy  Spirit^  and  therefore  was  certainly  of  divine  insti- 
tution. Surely  then  we  may  now  leave  it  with  our  readers 
to  determine  on  what  ground  Dr.  Campbell  could  be  jus- 
tified in  saying,  that  the  church  of  England  has  "  avoided 
limiting  the  Christian  ministry  to  one  particular  model." 

Whether  he  has  done  justice  to  his  own  church  in  as- 
signing the  same  doctrine  and  conduct  to  her,  is  a  point 
which  we  are  not  called  upon  to  decide  ;  although  we  can- 
not help  taking  notice  of  the  unnatural  association  which 
he  endeavours  to  establish  between  the  doctrine  of  the 
church  of  England,  and  that  of  the  Westminster  Confession 
of  Faith,  the  authors  of  which,  at  the  very  time  of  com- 
piling it,  entertained  such  a  mortal  enmity  against  that 
church,  that  they  had  sworn  in  their  soleynn  league  and  co- 
venant^ to  "  endeavour,  without  respect  of  persons,  the  ex- 
tirpation of  prelacy,  with  all  ecclesiastical  officers  depend- 
ing on  that  hierarchy."  it  cannot  be  difficult  to  perceive 
how  far  this  conduct  in  the  authors  is  entitled  to  the  praise 
of  "  moderation,"  which  our  Lecturer  bestows  on  the 
doctrine  of  his  Westminster  confession,  "  which,"  he  says, 
"  is  of  equal  authority  with  us,  as  the  thirty-nine  articles 
are  of  in  England;"  and  then,  after  quoting  the  folio v/ing 
words  from  the  25th  chapter  of  it,  "  Unto  the  catholic 
visible  church,  Christ  has  given  the  ministry",  oracles  and 
ordinances  of  God,  for  the  gathering  and  perfecting  of  the 
saints  in  this  life,  to  the  end  of  the  world  ,•"  he  immediately 
adds — "  And  this  is  all  that  is  said  on  the  subject."  We 
should  suppose,  however,  that  something  more  is  said  on 
the  subject,  when,  in  the  27th  chapter  of  the  same  con- 
fession, we  find  these  words — "  There  be  only  two  sacra- 
ments ordained  by  Christ  our  Lord,  neither  of  which  may 
be  dispensed  by  any  but  by  a  minister  of  the  word  law- 
fully ordainedr  And  if  we  wish  to  know  how,  in  their 
judgment,  a  minister  of  the  word  is  lawfully  ordained^  v»^e 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  133 

are  referred,  by  a  very  sensible  and  spirited  reviewer  of 
Dr.  CampbeH's  lectures,  to  the  form  of  presbyterial  church 
government^  agreed  upon  by  the  assembly  of  divines  at 
Westminster,  and  of  equal  authority  with  the  Confession 
of  Faiths  where  we  shall  find  it  decreed — that  "  every  mi- 
nister of  the  word  be  ordained  by  imposition  of  hands,  and 
prayer,  with  fasting,  by  those  preaching  presbyters  to  whom 
it  doth  belong."^ 

The  church  of  England,  however,  is  well  able  to  defend 
the  doctrine  of  her  own  articles  and  liturgy,'— With  the 
Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  we  have  at  present  no 
concern,  farther  than  to  take  notice  of  Dr.  Campbell's  very 
partial  appeal  to  its  decision.  But  there  is  another  point, 
which  he  brings  forward,  as  particularly  applicable  to  those 
of  the  Episcopal  persuasion  in  this  country,  and  to  which 
it  behoves  us,  therefore,  to  direct  our  attention,  with  a 
view  to  defend  ourselves  from  the  imputation  of  inconsis- 
tencv,  in  a  matter  of  such  importcince.  It  is  stated  in  the 
following  words—"  I  shall  add  to  these  the  doctrine  of  the 
Episcopal  reformed  church  of  Scotland,  contained  in  a 
confession  of  faith  ratified  by  law  in  this  country  in  156/; 
which,  though  set  aside  in  the  time  of  the  civil  wars,  to 
make  room  for  the  Westminster  confession,  was  re-enacted 
after  the  restoration,  and  continued  in  force  till  the  aboli- 
tion of  prelacy  at  the  revolution."  In  the  very  beginning 
of  this  statement  we  meet  with  an  expression,  which  must 
appear  a  little  ambiguous,  and  not  easy  to  be  understood, 
as  made  use  of  by  a  writer  of  Dr.  Campbell's  professional 
character. — When  we  look  back  to  the  date  which  he  fixes 
for  the  legal  ratification  of  this  confession  of  faith,  it  is 
natural  for  us  to  ask,  what  he  means,  by  saying,  that  "  it 
contains  the  doctrine  of  the  Episcopal  reformed  church  of 
Scodand  ?"  It  was  drawn  up  by  those  early  reformers  who 
called  themselves  "  the  congi-egation,"  of  which  the  famous 

*  See  the  Anti-Jaccbin  Eevie^j  for  May,  18G1,  p.  21. 


134  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

John  Knox  was  the  great  leader  and  director :  and  We 
know,  that  in  the  Parliament  which,  gave  it  a  legal  sanc- 
tion, there  were  some  bishops^  and  men  of  Episcopal  prin- 
ciples. But  could  Dr.  Campbell  consistently  acknowledge 
that  these  persons  were  on  the  reforming  side,  or  had  any 
leading  hand  in  bringing  forward  this  new  confession,  when 
such  an  acknowledgment  would  directly  fly  in  the  face  of 
that  fundamental  article  of  the  claim  of  rights  which  led  to 
^'  the  abolition  of  prelacy  at  the  revolution,"  and  declared 
*'  this  to  be  one  cause  of"  such  abolition,  that  the  "  nation 
had  reformed  from  popery  by  presbyters  .^" 

We  must,  therefore,  suppose,  that  our  Lecturer's  vague 
appellation  of  the  "  Episcopal  reformed  church  of  Scot- 
land," can  only  be  applicable  to  the  state  of  that  church  at 
the  time  when  she  was  regularly  formed  and  constituted, 
according  to  the  true  Episcopal  model.  And  on  this  sup- 
position we  need  not  wonder,  that  her  Confession  of  Faith 
was  set  aside  to  make  room  for  that  of  the  Westminster 
reformers,  who,  no  doubt,  found  their  own  Confession 
more  suitable  to  the  purpose  of  that  "  solemn  league  and 
covenant,"  by  which  they  were  bound  to  effect,  if  they 
could,  the  extirpation  of  prelacy,  and  every  thing  connected 
with  it.  But  when  our  Professor  thought  proper  to  men- 
tion the  "  re-enacting  of  the  former  confession  after  the 
restoration,"  he  should  also  have  informed  his  students, 
that  the  act  which  restored  the  former  Episcopal  govern- 
ment, declared  that  government  to  be  most  "  agreeable  to 
the  word  of  God."  And  if  he  had  likewise  taken  notice 
that  the  re-enacting  the  confession  alluded  to,  and  "  con- 
tinuing it  in  force  till  the  revolution,"  was  a  thing  far  from 
pleasing  to  the  bishops  of  that  period ;  it  was  no  more  than 
what  plainly  appeared  from  the  jealousy  which  they  ex- 
pressed, in  regard  to  the  test  act,  as  it  was  called,  in  1681, 
which  imposed  this  confession  upon  them,  under  a  solemn 
oath,  enforced  by  severe  penalties.  So  great  indeed  was 
their  alarm  on  that  account,  that  some  of  them  refused  to 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  135 

take  the  oath  in  the  sense  which  was  then  put  upon  it  by 
the  enemies  of  the  Episcopal  estabhshment,  till  their  scru- 
ples were  removed  by  an  explanatory  act  of  council^  de- 
claring, that  "  though  the  confession  of  1560,  being  framed 
in  the  infancy  of  the  reformation,  deserves  due  praise  ;  yet 
they  were  not  required  to  swear  to  every  proposition  or 
clause  in  it,  but  only  to  the  true  protestant  religion  con- 
tained there  ;  and  that  in  the  test  there  is  no  encroachment 
upon  the  intrinsic  spiritual  power  of  the  church,  as  exer- 
cised by  the  apostles,  and  the  most  pure  and  primitive 
church  of  the  three  first  centuries ;  nor  any  danger  from 
it  to  the  Episcopal  government  of  this  national  church, 
which  is  again  declared  to  be  most  agreeable  to  the  word 
of  God." 

But  there  would  have  been  no  occasion  for  our  taking 
any  notice  of  this  old  confession^  if  Dr.  Campbell  had 
not  thought  proper  to  make  it  the  ground  of  a  very 
contemptuous  and  unjust  reflection,  conveyed  in  these 
words — ^^  I  recur  to  it  the  rather,"  says  he,  "  in  order  to 
show  how  much,  on  this  article,  the  sentiments  of  our  late 
nonjurors  (for  we  have  none  of  that  description  at  present) 
differ  from  the  sentiments  of  those  whom  they  considered 
as  their  ecclesiastical  predecessors,  and  from  whom  they 
derived  their  spiritual  pedigree."^  Here  are  several 
marks  of  distinction  made  use  of,  and  all  with  a  view  to 
throw  some  reproach  on  the  persons  thus  distinguished. 
They  are  said  to  have  been  lately  nonjurors.  But  if  they 
are  not  so  noxu^  was  it  fair  to  hold  them  up  in  such  an  of- 
fensive light  ?  They  considered  themselves  as  having  had 
"  ecclesiastical  predecessors  ;"  and  as  that  implies  such  a 
thing  as  "  ecclesiastical  succession,"  nothing  more  was 
necessary  to  expose  them  to  ridicule,  imless  perhaps  to 
brand  such  "  succession"  with  the  odious  name  of  "  spiritual 
pedigree."    Yet,  notwithstanding  all  this  load  of  contempt 

*  liecture  iv. 


136  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

laid  on  the  late  nonjurors;  as  they  have  still,  it  seems,  suc- 
cessors, whom  our  Lecturer  afterwards  distinguishes  by 
the  title  of  the  "  Scotch  Episcopal  party,"  he  should  have 
considered  how  far  they  acknowledged  the  relation  to  which 
he  alludes,  before  he  involved  them  in  the  censure  of 
"  differing  so  much  in  their  sentiments"  from  those,  whom 
he,  perhaps,  not  they,  "  considered  as  their  ecclesiastical  pre-ii 
decessors."  He  could  not  but  know,  that  for  many  years 
after  the  reformation  was  begun  in  Scotland,  various  forms 
of  ecclesiastical  polity  were  adopted,  one  after  another,  and 
under  as  many  different  denominations.  But  did  he  ever 
hear,  from  sufficient  authority,  that  any  of  these  was 
acknowledged  by  the  "  late  nonjurors,"  to  have  been  the 
*•  Episcopal  reformed  church  of  Scotland  ?"  Did  he  ever 
hear  that  the  '^  Scotch  Episcopal  party,"  as  he  calls  them, 
would  expect  to  find  their  "  ecclesiastical  predecessors,"  in 
such  times  of  tumult  and  confusion,  as  exhibited  nothing- 
like  a  regular,  well-constituted  national  church?  If  we 
come  down  as  far  as  to  the  year  1610,  when  the  church  of 
England  gave  her  support  in  this  country  to  the  reforma- 
tion, of  which  she  has  justly  been  called  the  bulwark,  and 
contributed,  as  she  again  did  in  1661,  to  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  real  Episcopacy  among  us,  w^e  readily  and  gi*ate- 
fuUy  look  back  to  the  bishops  and  clergy,  who  were  thus 
duly  *'  consecrated  and  ordered,"  as  really  and  truly  our 
ecclesiastical  predecessors."  But  vv^e  go  much  higher  up 
for  the  fountain  of  our  "  spiritual  pedigree,"  however 
lightly  and  sarcastically  that  phrase  may  be  used  by  some^ 
deriving  it,  under  Christ's  authority, yrom  his  apostles,  and 
only  through  these  "  predecessors,"  as  the  intermediate 
channels  of  conveyance,  which  have  brought  it  regularly- 
down  to  us.  f  ■ 
From  the  sentiments  of  these  our  "  ecclesiastical  prede- 
cessors," on  the  article  of  church  government,  we  have 
surely  not  departed.  And  though  there  were  more  ground 
than  can  be  shown,  for  bringing  such  a  charge  against  us.- 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  1  sy 

it  would  come  but  awkwardly  from  one,  whose  sentiments 
on  this  same  article,  differ  so  much  as  Dr.  Campbell's  evi- 
dently do  differ  from  those  of  his  "  predecessors,"  if  he 
would  have  allowed  them  to  be  so  called,  who,  on  obtain- 
ing their  establishment  in  1690,  expressly  declared — "  that 
the  presbyterian  government  was  not  only  agreeable  to  the 
inclinations  of  the  people,  but  likewise  founded  on  the  word 
of  God,  and  therefore  of  divine  right."*  Yet  this  divine 
rights  a  minister  and  professor  of  that  same  establishment 
has  rejected  with  disdain;  and  after  telling  his  students, 
that  what  he  had  advanced  on  that  subject  "  did  not  affect 
the  lawfulness,  or  even,  in  certain  circumstances,  the  expe- 
diency of  the  Episcopal  model,  it  only  exposed  the  arro- 
gance of  pretending  to  a  jus  divinurn''' — lest  this  should  be 
thought  applicable  only  to  the  Episcopal  pretension,  he 
immediately  adds — "  I  am  satisfied  that  no  form  of  polity 
can  plead  such  an  exclusive  charter,  as  that  phrase,  in  its 
present  acceptation,  is  understood  to  imply.  The  claim 
is  clearly  the  offspring  of  sectarian  bigotry  and  ignorance." 
Such  is  the  language  now  used  by  those,  who  are  enjoying 
the  benefits  originally  procured  by,  what,  it  seems,  must 
at  last  be  called,  the  "  sectarian  bigotry  and  ignorance"  oi" 
their  predecessors. 

Our  Professor  indeed  had  told  his  hearers,  that  though  it 
was  his  purpose,  in  considering  the  question  about  the 
apostolic  form  of  church  government,  "  to  proceed  with  all 
the  candour  and  impartiality  of  which  he  was  capable  ;  yet 
he  was  to  speak  out  boldly  what  appeared  to  him  most  pro- 
bably to  have  been  the  case,  without  considering  what  sect 


*  Their  great  champion,  Mr.  Anderson,  of  Dunbarton,  expressly  de- 
clared it  to  be  their  *^  firm  belief,  that  there  is  but  one  government  by 
divine  right,  viz.  the  presbyterian  y'  and  we  find  him  drawing  this  con- 
clusion at  the  end  of  his  work — "  Upon  the  whole,  I  conclude  that  the 
presbyterian  gcyverninent  is  of  divine  institution."  See  p.  o7  and  341  of 
his  Defence  of  the  Church  Government,  Faith,  Worship  and  Spirit  of  tht 
Presbyterians,  iStt:.  printed  at  Glasgow  1714. 

18 


1.38  General  Def erne  of  Episcopacy* 

or  party  it  might  either  offend  or  gratify."*  With  this 
resolution,  he  proceeds  to  the  examination  of  the  fact,  and 
sets  out  with  acknowledging,  "  that  the  apostles  regularly 
established  churches,  and  settled  therein  proper  officers  or 
ministers,t  who  were  chiefly  distinguished  by  the  three 
terms — ^bishops  or  overseers,  presbyters  or  elders,  and 
deacons  or  attendants.  Now,  the  doubts  that  have  arisen 
are  chiefly  concerning  the  two  first  of  these  names— ^wAo/»s 
and  presbyters ;  and  the  question  is,  whether  they  are  names 
for  the  same  office,  or  for  different  offices."f — And  then 
he  immediately  adds—"  This  at  least  is  the  first  question ; 
for  it  must  be  owned,  that  there  have  been  some  strenuous 
advocates  for  the  apostolical  origin  of  Episcopacy,  who 
have  entirely  given  up  the  argument  founded  on  the 
names."  And  when  the  argument  is  thus  given  up,  there 
needs  no  longer  be  any  question,  7?r.s^  or  last^  about  that 
on  which  it  is  founded. 

The  argument  maintained  by  those  who  are  advocates 
for  the  apostolical  origin  of  Episcopacy,  is  not  founded  on 
names  but  things ;  and  therefore  the  question  is  not  whe- 
ther the  church  officers,  called  presbyters  or  elders  in  the 
apostles'  days,  might  not  also  be  called  bishops  or  over- 
seers, as  having  the  oversight  or  charge  of  a  certain  por- 
tion of  the  flock  of  Christ?  but,  whether  in  that  character 
they  had  the  apostolic  power  of  ordaining  others,  and  such 
authority  to  govern  and  direct  the  inferior  overseers,  as 
was  evidently  committed  to  the  highest  order  of  church 
officers,  who  were  afterwards  peculiarly  distinguished  by 
the  title  of  bishops  P  In  the  passage  quoted  by  Dr.  Camp- 
bell from  the  Acts  of  the  ApostlesJ  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  those  who  are  called  elders,  or  presbyters  of  the 
church,  are  also  denominated  overseers  or  bishops.  But  it 
does  not  hence  follow  that  they  had  the  power  of  ordina- 
tion, or  any  such  authority  as  was  committed  to  Timothy, 

*  Lecture  iv.  f  Ibid.  \  Ibid.         !|  Aets  xx.  17,  28. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  139 

when  he  was  appointed  to  take  charge  of  the  church  at 
Ephesus,  as  its  proper  bishop  and  governor.  If  we  only 
observe  the  difference  in  the  apostle's  directions  to  him  and 
to  them,  we  need  no  other  proof  that  these  presbyters  were 
not  authorized  to  execute  those  offices,  for  discharging 
which  Timothy  had  been  purposely  set  over  them.  In  St. 
Paul's  admonitions  to  them,  he  puts  them  in  mind  of  their 
duty  as  pastors,  and  warns  them  to  "  take  heed  to  them- 
selves, and  to  all  that  part  of  God's  flock,"  as  distinguished 
from  the  shepherds,  which  was  entrusted  to  their  care 
and  oversight :  Whereas  in  the  charge  given  to  Timothy, 
he  is  empowered  to  watch  over,  not  the  flock  only,  but  the 
shepherds  also,  the  subordinate  clergy  as  well  as  the  laity, 
in  that  part  of  the  church  committed  to  his  inspection. — 
There  were  some  things,  which  he  was  not  only  to  "  com- 
mand and  teach,"  but  to  charge  others,  that  they  should 
teach  them  also.  Such  as  were  proposed  for  the  office  of 
deacons,  he  was  to  prove  and  examine,  and  if  found  blame- 
less, to  admit  them  to  it ;  that  so,  '  ■  by  using  the  office  of 
a  deacon  well,  they  might  purchase  to  themselves  a  good 
degree,"  and  in  due  time  be  found  fit  for  a  higher  station 
in  the  church  ;  even  for  discharging  the  duties  of  elders  or 
presbyters.  Against  these  presbyters,  Timothy  was  di- 
rected' to  "  receive  no  accusation,  but  before  two  or  three 
witnesses :  and  them  that  sinned  he  was  to  rebuke  before 
aU,  without  preferring  one  before  another,"  and,  like  an 
equitable  judge,  "  doing  nothing  by  partiality."  In  a  word, 
he  was  charged  to  "  lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man ;"  that 
so,  by  avoiding  such  rashness  in  exercising  his  power  of 
ordination,  he  might  not  be  a  "  partaker  of  other  men's 
sins,  but  keep  himself  pure"  from  any  such  abuse  of  his 
authority.  In  this  apostolic  charge,  then,  we  see  delineated, 
in  the  most  accurate  manner,  all  the  particulars,  in  which 
bishops  have  been  considered,  since  the  days  of  the  apos- 
tles, as  superior  to  presbyters  ;  and  he,  who  will  not 
acknowledge  Timothy  to  have  been  bishop  at  EphesuS; 


i.46  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

may  as  well  deny,  that  there  have  ever  been  bishops  in  any 
part  of  the  world,  or  that  there  are  at  present  twenty-six  of 
that  order  in  England. 

But  in  answer  to  all  this,  our  Lecturer  holds  up  a  part 
of  St.  Paul's  account,  and  only  one  part  of  what  the  aposde 
says  of  Timothy's  ordination.  For — "  in  regard  to  the 
imposition  of  hands,  which  is  considered,"  he  says,  "  by 
many''*  (we  would  hope  the  Doctor  himself  was  one  of  the 
many)  "  as  a  necessary  attendant  on  ordination,  we  find 
this  also  attributed  to  the  presbytery  ;"^  as  to  which,  we 
are  told,  but  without  any  proof,  that  "  all  Christian  anti- 
quity concurs  in  affixing  this  name  to  what  may  be  called 
the  consistory  of  a  particular  church,  or  the  college  of  its 
pastors  :"  therefore  as  Timothy  was  ordained  by  the  laying 
on  of  the  hands  of  this  presbytery^  or  college  of  pastors,  it 
could  not  have  been  to  the  office  of  a  bishop,  in  the  proper 
ecclesiastical  sense  of  the  word,  since,  according  to  Dr. 
Campbell,  no  such  office  was  known  m  the  church  at  that 
time.  Yet  he  acknowledges,  that  "  this  is  the  only  passage 
in  the  New  Testament,  in  which  the  Greek  word  for  pres- 
bytery is  applied  to  a  Christian  council ;"  and  if  we  may 
,  take  the  opinion  of  Calvin^  as  of  equal  weight  with  that  of 
many  of  his  followers,  on  the  subject  of  presbyterian  or- 
dination, he  expressly  denies,  that  by  the  presbytery  in  this 
text,  was  meant  a  college  of  presbyters,  and  reads  it,  as 
if  the  apostle  had  said—"  neglect  not  the  gift  of  the  office 
of  a  presbyter  which  was  given  thee  by  prophecy,  with  the 
laying  on  of  hands."  It  has  been  thought  by  some,  that  as 
the  apostles  themselves  were  sometimes  called  elders  or 
presbyters,  therefore,  a  meeting  of  a  certain  number  of 
them,  for  the  ordination  of  Timothy,  might  properly  enough 
be  called  the  presbytery.  But  as  St.  Paul,  in  another 
place,t  speaks  of  himself  as  the  sole  ordainer  of  Timothy, 
so  there  is  a  diflfereQce  of  expression  in  the  two  accounts 

•  1  Tim.  iv.  14.  t  2  Tim.  i.  6, 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  141 

which  he  gives  of  this  matter;  and  from  the  one  it  appears 
that  Timothy  was  ordained  by  the  putting  on  of  the  apos- 
tle's hands,  to  convey  authority;  and  from  the  other,  that 
this  was  done  with  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  pres- 
bytery, as  a  testimony  of  their  approbation.*  Having  al- 
ready admitted,  that  at  the  time  when  St.  Paul  wrote  his 
several  epistles,  the  elders  or  presbj^ters  of  the  church  were 
sometimes  called  bishops^  or  overseers  of  what  was  com- 
mitted to  their  charge,  we  need  hardly  take  notice  of  our 
Lecturer's  "  argument,t  that  there  were  but  two  orders  of 
ministers  then  established,  because  Paul,  in  addressing  the 
Philippians,  expresses  himself  in  this  manner, — To  all  the 
saints  at  Philippi,  with  the  bishops  and  deacons."f  For  if 
we  should  say,  that  they  also  had  an  apostle  of  their  own, 
and,  therefore,  a  bishop  "  in  the  proper  and  ecclesiastical 
sense  of  the  word,"  it  would  be  no  more  than  what  St. 
Paul  said,  when  he  told  them,  "  I  supposed  it  necessary  to 
send  to  you  Epaphroditus,  my  brother  and  companion  in 
labour,  and  fellow  soldier,  but  your  apostle  ;"§  on  which 
Jerome  observes — *•''  By  degress,  in  process  of  time,  others 
were  ordained  apostles^  by  those  whom  our  Lord  had  chosen, 
as  that  passage  to  the  Philippians  shows,  '  I  supposed  it 
necessary  to  send  unto  you  Epaphroditus  your  apostle ;"  and 
ITieodoret  gives  this  reason  why  Epaphroditus  is  called 
the  apostle  of  the  Philippians — ^"  He  was  entrusted  with  the 
Episcopal  government,  as  being  their  bishop."    The  same 


*  The  Greek  preposition  dia,  signifies  the  means  by  which  the  au- 
thority was  conveyed:  the  other  preposition  ^{\a,^  signifies  no  more  than 
concurrence  or  approbation,  such  as  is  still  given  in  the  church  of  Eng- 
land, where  the  rubric  directs,  that  "  the  bishop,  with  the  priests  present, 
shall  lay  their  hands  severally  upon  the  head  of  every  one  that  receiveth 
ihe  order  of  priesthood. 

I  Lecture  iv. 

\  It  should  rather  be  rendered,  "  with  bishops  and  deacons" — as  the 
original  has  not  the  restrictive  articles. 

§  Phil.  ii.  25,  where  our  translators  have  rendered  it  messenger. 


142  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

writer  tells  us,*  "  those  now  called  bishops,  were  anciently 
called  apostles ;  but  in  process  of  time  the  name  of  apos- 
tle was  left  to  them  who  were  truly  apostles,  and  the  name 
of  bishop  was  restrained  to  those  who  were  anciendy  called 
apostles  :  thus  Epaphroditus  was  the  apostle  of  the  Philip- 
pians,  Titus  of  the  Cretians,  and  Timothy  of  the  Asiatics." 
—Yet  Dr.  Campbell  asserts,  that  "  Theodoret  was  very 
much  puzzledf  where  to  find  the  origin  of  the  office  of  bi- 
shop, as  the  word  in  his  time  implied,  when  he  imagined 
he  discovered  it  in  a  phrase,  which  occurs  but  once  in  the 
New  Testament,"!  where  St.  Paul  mentions  his  brethren, 
as  the  apostles  of  the  churches.  For  we  know  that  Barna- 
bas, as  well  as  Paul,  was  called  an  apostle,  and  we  have 
seen  Epaphroditus  expressly  mentioned  as  the  apostle  of 
the  Philippians,  to  whom  Theodoret  made  no  scruple  to 
join  Timothy  and  Titus,  as  the  apostles  of  their  respective 
churches  in  Ephesus  and  Crete. 

We  have  already  taken  notice  of  the  Episcopal  autho- 
rity, which  was  certainly  committed  to  Timothy  as  Bishop 
of  the  church  at  Ephesus  ;  the  evidence  is  equally  clear 
and  irrefragable  for  that  of  Titus  in  Crete ;  to  the  nature 
and  design  of  whose  commission,  St.  Paul  refers  in  the 
plainest  terms,  when  he  tells  him — "  For  this  cause  left  I 
thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order  the  things 
that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  or  presbyters,  in  every 
city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee."§  As  the  gospel  was  al- 
ready planted  in  Crete,  it  may  be  presumed,  that  some 
presbyters  had  been  ordained  in  it  likewise  ;  in  which  case, 
if  they  had  power  to  ordain  others,  there  was  no  occasion 
to  leave  Titus  there  for  the  same  purpose,  as  such  an  inva- 


•  On  1  Tim.  chap.  iii. 

I  Not  more  puzzled  than  the  Doctov  himself  was,  where  to  find  the 
origin  of  the  power  of  his  presbytery,  when  he  was  obliged  to  have  re- 
course for  it,  to  what  he  acknowledges  to  be  the  only  passage  in  the 
New  Testament,  in  which  the  word  is  applied  to  a  Christian  council. 

I  2  Cor.  viii.  23.  ^  Titus  i.  5. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  143 

sion  of  their  office  would  have  tended  to  promote  strife  and 
contention,  rather  than  peace  and  good  order. — But  sup- 
posing that  there  were  no  presbyters  in  Crete,  till  Titus 
was  left  there  for  ordaining  some  ;  yet  when  he  had  or- 
dained a  few,  he  might  have  gone  away  and  left  them  to 
"  set  in  order  every  thing  that  was  wanting ;"  to  carry  on 
all  future  ordinations,  and  govern  the  church  by  their  own 
authority.  Yet,  instead  of  this,  in  consequence  of  the 
Episcopal  power  which  had  been  committed  to  him,  he  is 
directed  by  St.  Paul,  not  only  *'  to  ordain  presbyters  in 
every  city,"  but  also  to  "  rebuke  with  all  authority,  to  ad- 
monish heretics,"  and  in  case  of  their  obstinacy,  to  "  re- 
ject" them  from  the  communion  of  the  church.  In  all 
these  respects,  it  is  evident  that  the  authority  of  Titus  in 
the  church  of  Crete,  was  the  same  as  that  of  Timothy  in 
the  church  of  Ephesus.  The  same  caution  is  enjoined  to 
both  in  the  important  affair  of  ordination,  whether  of  pres- 
byters or  deacons,  and  the  same  reason  assigned  for  their 
being  thus  cautious,  because  "  the^  bishop  must  be  blame- 
less,— as  the  steward  of  God ;"  and  we  know,  it  is  a  pecu- 
liar part  of  the  steward's  office  to  provide,  inspect,  and 
watch  over  the  inferior  servants  of  the  family. 

When  we  now  look  back  to  the  clear  and  distinct  account, 
which  is  given  of  the  Episcopal  authority  in  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul  to  Timothy  and  Titua,  and  see  these  distin- 
guished ministers  of  Christ  exercising  the  power  committed 
to  them,  for  the  edification  and  good  government  of  the 
churches,  over  which  they  were  appointed  to  preside,  we 
cannot  perceive  any  *'  species  of  vanity,"  far  less  any  '*  evi- 
dent falsehood"  in  those  postscripts  subjoined  to  the  epis- 
tles, which  style  Timothy  and  Titus  "  the  first  ordained 
bishops,  the  one  of  the  church  of  the  Ephesians,  and  the 
other  of  that  of  the  Cretians."     Neither  are  we  at  all  stag- 


*  Not  a  bishop,  as  our  traiulators  have  rendered  it,  leaving  out  the  re- 
strictive article. 


144  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

gered  in  our  belief  of  the  truth  of  these  postscripts,  biy 
Dr.  Campbell's  asserting,  that  "  Timothy  and  Titus  were 
not  made  bishops  till  about  fve^  hundred  years  after  their 
death,"'!'  when  we  find  so  much  unexceptionable  evidence 
to  the  contrary. 

But  still  our  Lecturer  insists,  that  they  could  "  not  be 
properly  bishops,  in  the  modern  acceptation,"  because  the 
powers  with  which  they  were  invested,  were  conferred 
upon  them,  not  as  bishops,  or  fixed  governors,  but  in  their 
extraordinary  and  temporary  character  of  evangelists,  I 
shall  not  say,  that  such  a  man  as  Dr.  Campbell  would  bor- 
row this  idea  from  writers  of  very  inferior  talents ;  but 
nothing  is  more  certain,  than  its  being  one  of  the  most 
hackneyed  topics,  even  in  the  meanest  publications,  which 
the  two  last  centuries  produced  against  the  apostolic  insti- 
tution of  Episcopacy.J  It  is  still  more  surprising,  that 
such  an  idea  should  be  adopted  by  the  same  author,  who 
tells  us,  in  another  of  his  works,  that  the  word  from  which 
the  term  evangelist  is  derived,  "  relates  to  the  first  infor- 
mation that  is  given  to  a  person  or  people,  that  is,  when 
the  subject  may  be  properly  called  news.  Thus,  in  the 
Acts,"  he  says,  "  it  is  frequently  used  for  expressing  the 
first  publication  of  the  gospel,  in  a  city  or  a  village,  or 
amongst  a  particular  people."||  Nay,  in  the  very  lecture 
now  before  us,  he  acknowledges,  that  the  word  "  denotes 

*  This  word/te,  though  not  in  the  list  of  errata,  has  been  said  to  be  a 
mistake  of  the  printer,  and  (or  Jive,  it  seems  we  should  read  tbree;  which, 
to  be  sure,  would  lessen  the  error  of  the  author  a  little  as  to  the  date, 
but  could  make  no  alteration,  in  our  opinion,  as  to  the  Jact,  when  we 
know  so  well  that  Timothy  and  Titus  were  certainly  made  bishops  in 
their  own  lifetime,  as  well  as  evangelists. 

t  Lecture  v. 

I  See  Mr.  Anderson's  (of  Dunbarton)  Defence,  Sec.  who  affirms,  as 
Dr.  Campbell  does,  without  any  proof,  that  "  Timothy  and  Titus  were 
extraordinary  officers,  and,  therefore,  it  caimot  be  thence  inferred,  thai 
their  superiority  of  power  was  designed  to  be  perpetual."     p.  104. 

I)  Sec  the  Preliminary  Dissertation^-  prefi.xetl  to  his  "  Translation  of 
the  Gobpel:"-,"  p.  29:1 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  145 

properly,  to  preachy  or  declare  the  good  news,  that  is,  the 
gOspel,  to  those  who  had  before  known  nothing  of  the  mat- 
ter."— It  is  evident  then,  that  in  his  opinion,  the  disciples 
Whom  "  Christ  gave  as  evangelists,  for  the  work  of  the 
ministry,"  must  have  been  the  persons  emploved,  whatever 
was  their  character  or  station,  in  communicating  the  know- 
ledge of  the  gospel  to  those  to  whom  it  was  news^  and  who 
had  never  before  heard  of  its  glad  tidings. — But  how  could 
Timothy  and  Titus  be  considered  as  evangelists^  in  this  sense 
of  the  word,  to  the  churches  of  Ephesus  and  Crete,  where 
St.  Paul  himself  had  been  preaching  the  gospel,  before 
they  were  empowered  to  take  charge  of  these  churches ; 
and  in  that  of  Ephesus,  there  had  been  elders  expressly 
Ordained  for  taking  heed  to  the  flock  committed  to  their 
care,  and  feeding  them  with  sound  doctrine  t  It  is  true 
that  Timothy  was  directed  by  St.  Paul  to  do  the  work  of 
an  evangelist^  or  preacher  of  the  gospel ;  but  a  preaching 
apostle  or  bishop  was  no  such  extraordinary  character  as  to 
be  invested,  merely  on  that  account,  with  a  pre-eminence 
over  the  other  overseers  of  the  church  at  Ephesus.  If  it 
was  not  then  as  evangelists^  that  Timothy  and  Titus  were 
entrusted  with  the  inspection  and  government  of  the  Ephe- 
sian  and  Cretian  churches,  it  must  have  been  as  persons, 
in  whom  the  apostolic  commission  was  continued,  with  all 
the  ordinary  powers  which  were  necessary  for  answering 
the  purpose  of  that  important  commission. 

But  it  has  been  pretended,  by  those  who  oppose  the 
continuance  of  such  an  apostolic  commission  in  the  way 
of  Episcopal  succession,  that  the  apostles  themselves  were 
ministers  of  the  same  extraordinary  character  as  these  evan- 
gelists, whose  office  was  not  to  be  continued  any  longer 
than  the  first  publication  of  the  gospel  required.  Follow- 
ing his  predecessors  in  this  beaten  tract,  Dr.  Campbell  has 
affirmed,  that  "  the  apostolate  itself  was  one  of  those  extra- 
ordinary offices  which  were  in  their  nature  temporary', 
and  did  not  admit  succession :"  in  support  of  which  very 

19 


146  General  Defence  of  Episicopacy, 

bold,  if  not  extraordinary  assertion,  he  brings  forward  se- 
veral arguments,  to  which  the  "  attention  of  his  hearers  is 
entreated."*  First— he  refers  them  for  the  character  of 
an  aposde,  to  the  brief  description  given  of  it  by  St.  Peter, 
as  sufficient  to  show,  that  the  office  could  be  but  temporary, 
and  could  have  no  existence  after  the  extinction  of  that 
generation.  The  words  which  are  supposed  to  show  the 
"  absurdity,  as  well  as  aif  ogance  of  modem  pretenders,"t 
are  those  made  use  of,  on  occasion  of  the  election  of 
Matthias  into  the  place  of  the  traitor  Judas,  when  Peter 
said — "  Wherefore,  of  these  men,  which  have  companied 
with  us  all  the  time  that  the  Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out 
among  us,  beginning  from  the  baptism  of  John,  unto  the 
same  day  that  he  was  taken  up  from  us,  must  one  be 
ordained  to  be  a  witness  with  us  of  his  resurrection." J  Is 
it  possible,  that  our  learned  Lecturer  could  infer  from  these 
words,  that  the  essence  of  the  apostolic  character  consisted 
in  "  having  seen  Jesus  Christ  in  the  flesh  after  his  resurrec- 
tion,"— when  we  are  assured,  "  that  he  was  seen  in  the 
flesh  of  above  five  hundred  brethren  at  once,  after  he  rose 
from  the  dead,"  though  at  that  time  there  were  only  eleven 
apostles? — »And  if  he  had  requested  the  attention  of  his 
pupils  to  the  nature  of  that  commission,  which  these  eleven 
received  from  their  Lord  and  Master,  with  the  promise 
subjoined  to  it,  that  he  was  to  be  with  them  always,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world,  it  must  have  been  no  easy  mat- 
ter, we  should  suppose,  to  convince  those  who  firmly 
believed  the  truth  of  this  promise,  that  the  eleven  apostles 
could  have  no  successors,  and  their  commission  "  no  exist- 
ence after  the  extinction  of  that  generation." 

His  second  argument,  in  support  of  this  opinion,  is  laid 
down  in  these  words — "  The  apostles  were  distinguished 
by  prerogatives,  which  did  not  descend  to  any  after  them. 
Of  this  kind  were — their  receiving  their  mission  immedi- 

*  Lecture  V.  f  Ibid.  +  Acts  i.  21,  22. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  147 

ately  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, — ^the  power  of  confer- 
ring, by  imposition  of  hands,  the  miraculous  gifts  of  the 
spirit,  on  whomsoever  they  would — and  the  knowledge 
they  had,  by  inspiration,  of  the  whole  doctrine  of  Christ."^ 
But  if  these  "  prerogatives  did  not  descend  to  any  after 
them,"  it  was  not  because  they  constituted  any  essential 
part  of  the  apostolic  office,  but  only  as  they  were  qualifica- 
tions peculiarly  necessar\^  for  the  discharge  of  that  office, 
in  laying  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  church,  and  pro- 
pagating the  Christian  doctrine  throughout  the  world.  It 
was,  no  doubt,  absolutely  necessary,  that  the  frst  apostles 
of  the  Christian  church  should  '^  receive  their  mission  im- 
mediately from  Christ  himself,"  because  there  was  none 
else  from  whom  they  could  receive  it.  But  the  same 
necessity  could  not  be  said  to  exist,  when  they,  having  once 
been  "  sent  by  Christ,  even  ^s  the  Father  had  sent  him," 
had  thereby  received  power  to  continue  that  mission  in 
such  a  way,  as  that  it  might  be  regularly  handed  down  to 
the  end  of  the  world.  As  to  the  miraculous  powers,  and 
inspired  knowledge  of  divine  truth,  with  which  the  eleven 
apostles  were  endued  in  such  an  eminent  degree,  it  does 
not  appear,  that  these  marks  of  distinction,  except  perhaps 
in  that  eminence  of  degree,  were  peculiar  to  them  ;  since 
we  read  of  many  others,  who  possessed  the  same  power  of 
working  miracles,  and  the  same  extraordinary  gifts  of  the 
spirit.  The  seven  deacons  were  all  "  men  full  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  wisdom ;"  and  it  is  particularly  mentioned  of 
one  of  them,  that  "  he  did  great  wonders  and  miracles 
among  the  people,"  and  that  his  adversaries  "  were  not 
able  to  resist  the  wisdom,  and  the  spirit,  by  which  he 
spake."t  It  is  evident  then,  that  the  apostolic  office  did 
not  consist  in  the  possession  of  these  extraordinary  privi- 
leges, which,  at  the  first  setting  out  of  the  gospel,  for  the 
sake  of  giving  power  and  progress  to  it,  were  bestowed  on 

•  Lecture  v.  t  Acts  vi.  8—10. 


148  General  Defence  of  Episcopacif* 

many  others  of  inferior  stations  in  the  church.— These 
could  not  possibly  preclude  the  apostles  from  having  suc- 
cessors in  that  superior  office,  which,  for  answering  ail  the 
ordinary  purposes  intended  by  it,  was  to  be  continued  as 
long  as  the  church  itself  should  exist  upon  earth. 

Yet  our  Lecturer  gives  it,  as  his  third  argument  against 
such  an  apostolic  succession,  that  "  the  mission  of  the 
?ipostles  was  of  quite  a  different  kind  from  that  of  any  ordi- 
nary pastor.  It  was  to  propagate  the  gospel  throughout 
the  world,  both  among  Jews  and  pagans,  and  not  to  take 
the  charge  of  a  particular  flock.  The  terms  of  their  com- 
mission are,  Go  and  teach  all  nations  :  Again,  Go  ye  into 
all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.  No 
doubt  they  may  be  styled  bishops  or  overseers,  but  in  a 
sense  very  different  from  that  in  which  it  is  applied  to  the 
inspector  over  the  inhabitants  of  a  particular  district.— -» 
Thev  were  universal  bishops  ;  the  whole  church,  or  rather 
the  whole  earth,  was  their  charge,  and  they  were  all  col- 
leagues one  of  another.""*  All  this  perhaps  is  true  with 
respect  to  the  general  nature  of  their  commission,  although 
they  might  find  it  convenient,  if  not  necessary,  to  assign  to 
each  a  particular  portion  of  the  charge  committed  to  them. 
It  was  the  current  report  of  antiquity,  that  they  divided 
the  earth  among  them ;  and  to  some  such  division,  St.  Paul 
seems  to  allude,  where  he  says — "  When  James,  Cephas, 
and  John,  who  seemed  to  be  pillars,  perceived  the  grace 
that  was  given  unto  me,  they  gave  to  me  and  Barnabas  the 
right  hands  of  fellowship,  that  we  should  go  unto  the  hea- 
then, and  they  unto  the  circumcision."!  The  same  St. 
Paul,  who  though  not  of  the  eleven^  is  yet  acknowledged, 
as  well  as  Matthias,  to  have  been  an  apostle,  assures  us^ 
that  "-  he  so  strove  to  preach  the  gospel,  not  where  Christ 
was  named,  lest  he  should  build  upon  another  man's  foun- 
dation :"J    And  we  have  every  reason  to  believe,  that  the 

»  Lecture  V.  t  Gal.  ii.  9-  \  Rom.  xv.  20. 


General  Defence  of  Eptscopacij.  149 

other  apostles  conducted  themselves  in  the  same  regular 
and  orderly  manner.  No — says  our  Professor — "  If  they 
had  limited  themselves  to  any  thing  less  than  the  world, 
it  would  have  been  disobedience  to  the  express  command 
they  had  received  from  their  Master,  to  go  into  all  nations, 
and  to  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature."  But  surely 
the  obedience  which  they  owed  to  this  command,  did  not 
require  that  every  individual  among  them  should  actually 
go  into  all  nations  ;  and  that  the  gospel  should  be  preached 
to  every  creature,  by  each  of  the  eleven  aposdes,  to  whom 
the  command  was  given.  It  was  enough,  that  no  nation 
was  omitted,  no  creature  neglected,  by  the  apostles  in 
general,  but  that,  as  St.  Paul  says  of  them,  "  their  sound 
went  into  all  the  earth,  and  their  words  unto  the  ends  of 
world."*  But  when  this  was  accomplisTied  by  their  com- 
mon and  united  efforts,  there  was  nothing  to  hinder  them 
from  exercising  their  apostolic  authority  over  the  churches, 
which  they  had  respectively  planted,  till  they  should  find 
proper  persons,  or  "  faithful  men,"-]"  as  St.  Paul  calls  them, 
on  whom  they  might  devolve  the  same  authority,  with 
power  to  transmit  it  from  age  to  age,  or  in  the  words  of 
their  Lord's  promise — "  even  unto  the  end  of  world." 

As  another  objection,  however,  to  this  plan  of  apostolic 
succession,  our  Lecturer  brings  forward  his  fourth  and  last 
argument,  which  he  states  in  these  words — "  As  a  full 
proof  that  the  matter  was  thus  universally  understood,  both 
in  their  own  age  and  in  the  times  immediately  succeeding, 
no  one,  on  the  death  of  an  apostle,  was  ever  substituted  in 
his  room  ;  and  when  that  original  sacred  college  was  extinct, 
the  title  became  extinct  with  it."J  But  what  signifies  the 
extinction  of  the  title  ?  Might  not  the  same  official  powers 
be  continued  under  different  titles  ?  To  take  another  simili- 
tude from  temporal  things  ;  are  we  not  accustomed  to  hear 
of  the  supreme  civil  power  being  enjoyed  in  one  country 

*  Rom.  X.  lb.  f  2  Tim.  ii.  2.  |  Lecture  v. 


150  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

by  a  King^  in  another  by  an  Emperor^  and  in  a  third,  very 
lately,  by  a  First  Consul;  while  each  of  these  titles  denotes 
a  person  possessed  of  supreme,  and  therefore  very  similar 
authority  ?  Dr.  Campbell  could  not  but  know  the  reason 
why,  as  well  as  the  time  when,  the  title  of  apostle  was  laid 
aside,  and  that  of  bishop  substituted  in  its  place.  Though 
he  had  quoted  Theodoret,  to  expose  the  folly  of  his  imagin- 
ing those  to  be  bishops  whom  St.  Paul  described  as  "  the 
apostles  of  the  churches,"  he  should  yet  have  recollected, 
that  the  same  Theodoret  mentions  their  successors,  as 
humbly  abstaining  from  the  name  of  apostles,  and  con- 
tenting themseh  es  with  that  of  bishops  ;  a  title  expressive 
of  the  care,  attention  and  vigilance,  which  their  office  re- 
quired.— To  what  purpose  then  was  our  author's  remark, 
that  "  on  the  death  of  an  apostle,  no  one  was  ever  substi- 
tuted in  his  room,"  if  by  no  one  he  means  no  aposde? 
And  that  this  was  his  meaning,  is  evident  from  the  pains  he 
has  taken  to  show,  that  neither  "  the  election  of  Matthias 
by  the  apostles,  nor  the  subsequent  admission  of  Paul  and 
Barnabas  to  the  apostleship,  formed  any  exception  to  what 
had  been  advanced  ;  for  they  came  not  as  successors  to  any 
one,  but  were  specially  called  by  the  Holy  Spirit  as  apostles, 
particularly  to  the  Gentiles."^  And  if  they  came  with 
apostolical  powers,  we  are  ready  to  admit,  that  it  is  of  no 
consequence  whether  "  they  came  as  successors  to  any 
one"  or  not ;  since  the  point  in  question  is  not,  whether 
there  should  be  now  just  twelve  bishops  in  the  whole  Chris- 
tian church,  and  each  of  them  able  to  trace  his  succession 
from  some  individual  apostle  j  but  whether  in  that  portion 
of  every  regularly  constituted  church  called  a  diocese,  there 
always  has  been,  from  the  days  of  the  apostles  to  the  pre- 
sent time,  some  ecclesiastical  person,  so  far  possessed  of 
the  apostolic  commission  and  character,  as  to  have  autho- 
rity to  ordain  and  superintend  the  presbyters  and  deacons 

*  Lecture  v. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  151 

under  his  spiritual  jurisdiction,  and  to  assist  in  preserving 
and  continuing  his  own  Episcopal  order,  as  also  in  what- 
ever else  is  necessary  to  the  care  and  good  government  of 
the  particular  national  church  to  which  he  belongs  ?  Now, 
the  admission  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  the  office  of  apostles, 
after  the  number  txvelve  was  completed,  settles  this  point, 
so  far  as  it  proves,  that  the  apostolic  office  was  not  limited 
to  those  "  who  companied  with  the  eleven  all  the  time  that 
the  Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out  among  them,"  and,  there- 
fore, was  not  such  as  necessarily  "  became  extinct,"  when, 
as  our  Lecturer  expresses  himself — "  that  original  sacred 
college  was  extinct." — On  the  contrary,  we  see  an  addition 
made  to  it  in  the  case  now  before  us;  and  though  he  tells 
us  that  "  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  specially  called  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  apostles,"  thereby  making  a  distinction,  and 
marking  a  difference,  as  it  were,  between  their  apostleship, 
and  that  which,  he  had  said,  was  "  received  immediately 
from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ^"*  yet  St.  Paul  himself,  who 
best  knew  how  this  matter  stood,  assures  us,  that  "  he  was 
an  apostle,  not  of  men,  neither  by  man,  but  by  Jesus  Christ, 
and  God  the  Father;"'^  which  not  only  points  to  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  himself  was  called  to  the  apostleship  by 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christy  but  at  the  same  time  clearly  shows, 
that  when  he  wrote  his  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  there  were 
in  the  church,  apostles,  who  had  been  ordained  to  their 
office  by  the  ministry  of  man.  Such,  we  have  seen,  was 
Epaphroditus,  whom  St.  Paul  calls  the  apostle  of  the  Phi- 
lippians.t  Such,  undoubtedly,  were  Timothy  and  Titus, 
and  those  brethren  who  are  distinguished  as  "  apostles  of 
the  churches,  the  glory  of  Christ."J 

*  Gal.  i.  1. 

t  Dr.  Campbell's  man  of  discernment— Hilary  the  deacon,  in  his 
Commentary  on  the  second  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians, 
says  expressly,  that  Epaphroditus  was  constituted  their  apostle  by  St. 
Paul  himself:  His  words  are,  **  Erat  enim  eorum  apostolus,  ab  apostolo 
factus." 

\  2  Cor.  viii.  23. 


1 52  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

Where  then  could  our  Lecturer  have  learned,  or  how 
could  he  pretend  to  teach  his  pupils,  that  the  apostolical 
office,  founded  on  the  commission  given  by  our  Lord  to 
the  eleven  apostles,  "  was  one  of  those  extraordinary  of- 
fices, which  were  in  their  nature  temporar}^,  and  did  not 
admit  succession?'^  There  was  a  school,  in  which  this 
lesson  was  taught,  but  from  which  we  can  hardly  suppose 
that  such  a  man  as  Dr.  Campbell  would  have  imbibed  the 
sentiments  he  has  avowed  on  this  subject.  Yet,  when  we 
observe  one  of  the  most  strenuous  advocates  for  the  papal 
supremacy  positively  asserting,  that  "  bishops  are-  not  pro- 
perly the  successors  of  the  apostles,  because  the  apostles 
Were  not  ordinary,  but  extraordinar\'  pastors,  such  as,  from 
the  nature  of  their  delegation,  could  have  no  successors,"* 
we  cannot  easilv  refrain  from  expressing  our  surprise  at 
guch  a  striking  coincidence  in  opinion,  between  the  popish 
cardinal,  and  the  presbyterian  professor ;  and  from  this, 
and  other  instances  of  a  similar  nature,  we  might  be  in- 
clined to  suspect,  that  between  popery  and  presbytery,  the 
difference^  in  many  things,  is  not  so  great  as  is  generally^ 
imagined. 

From  considering  the  nature  of  the  apostolic  office,  as 
admitting  no  succession,  and  the  peculiar  business  of  the 
Other  extraordinary  ministers  called  evangelists,  as  exem- 
plified in  Timothy  and  Titus,  our  author  passes,  bv  a  na- 
tural transition,  to  what  he  terms,  the  "  only  one  other  plea 
of  any  consequence  in  favour  of  the  apostolical  antiquity  of 

*  See  Cardinal  Bellarmine — De  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  cap.  24 — whose 
>vords  are  these — "  Episcopi  non  succedunt  proprie  apostolis,  quoniam 
apostoli  non  fuerunt  ordinarii,  sed  extraordinarii,  ei  quasi  delegati  pas- 
tores  quibiis  non  succeditur."  To  this  authority  Mr.  Anderson,  of  Dun- 
barton,  seems  to  have  referred,  when,  combating  the  argument  in  favour 
of  Episcopacy,  drawn  from  a  succession  in  the  apostoiate,  he  observed 
— "  The  church  of  Rome,  a  society  of  a  very  large  extent,  of  a  long 
standing,  and  such  as  has  produced  not  a  few  wise  and  great  men,  ex- 
pressly contradict  it,  denying  that  any  of  the  apostles  had  successor?, 
save  Peter,  in  the  papal  chair."     See  his  Dcferxe,  &.c.  p.  90. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  153 

Episcopacy ;  and  which  he  reserved  for  the  last,  because 
it  affords  an  excellent  handle  for  inquiring  into  the  real 
origin  of  subordination  among  the  Christian  pastors.  The 
plea  he  means  is  taken  from  the  Epistles  to  the  seven 
Asian  churches  in  the  apocalypse,  addressed  to  the  angels 
of  these  churches  severally,  and  in  the  singular  number ; 
to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Ephesus,  and  so  of  the  rest."*" 
At  his  first  setting  out  on  this  inquiry,  he  seems  at  a  loss 
what  account  to  give  of  the  peculiar  mode  of  address 
made  use  of  in  these  Epistles,  but  is  extremely  unwilling 
to  acknowledge  that  any  inference  can  be  drawn  from  it 
in  favour  of  Diocesan  Episcopacy,  This,  he  thinks,  would 
be  contrary  to  every  just  rule  of  interpretation  ;  and  yet 
he  appears  to  be  equally  dissatisfied  with  what  he  says  is 
<^  maintained  by  some  zealous  patrons  of  the  Presbyterian 
model,"  that  by  the  angel  is  meant,  according  to  the  allego- 
rical style,  that  consistory  of  elders,  called  the  Presbytery^ 
which,  the  better  to  show  the  union  that  ought  to  subsist 
among  the  members,  is  here  emphatically  considered  and 
addressed  as  one  person.  Between  these  two  interpreta- 
tions, which  have  respectively  distinguished  the  Episcopa- 
lian and  the  Presbyterian  party,  he  chooses  to  steer  a  mid- 
dle course,  and  to  adopt,  what  he  calls  an  intermediate  opi- 
nion, as  appearing  to  him  much  more  probable  than  either 
of  the  other  tw^o.  "  His  sentiment,  therefore,  is,  that,  as  in 
their  consistories  and  congregations,  it  would  be  necessary, 
for  the  sake  of  order,  that  one  should  preside,  both  in  the 
offices  of  religion,  and  in  their  consultations  for  the  com- 
mon good,  it  is  their  president  or  chairman,  that  is  here  ad- 
dressed under  the  name  of  angel." — This  opinion  he  af- 
terwards illustrates,  by  comparing  his  chairman  to  the 
"  speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  to  the  prolocutor 
of  either  house  of  convocation  in  England,  or  the  modera- 
tor of  an  ecclesiastical  judicatory  in  Scotland."     The  first 

*  Lecture  v. 
20 


154  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy 4 

of  these  comparisons  is  rather  unlucky,  as  the  appointment 
of  the  speaker  depends  on  the  will  of  the  Sovereign,  and, 
therefore,  implies  the  acknowledgment  of  a  superior :  And 
the  other  two  offices,  being  of  a  temporary  nature,  were  not 
properly  adapted  to  the  design  of  his  comparison,  unless 
he  had,  or  could  have  shown,  that  these  apocalyptic  bishops 
ever  descended  from  their  station,  and  became  common 
members  of  the  presbytery,  as  he  knew  to  be  always  the 
case  with  his  moderators. 

It  is  indeed  true,  that  the  epistles  addressed  to  the  angels 
mentioned  in  the  first  three  chapters  of  the  book  of  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John,  were  intended  for  the  use  of  those 
churches,  of  which  these  angels  are  represented  as  the 
directors  and  governors.  There  can  be  no  ground  to  sup- 
pose that  the  churches  themselves  were  meant  by  the  an- 
gels, when  the  distinction  between  them  is  so  plainly  laid 
down  in  these  words,  as  descriptive  of  the  mystery:-—" The 
seven  stars  are  the  angels  of  the  seven  churches,  and  the 
seven  candlesticks,  which  thou  sawest,  are  the  seven 
churches."^  Both  being  thus  distinguished  by  their  proper 
emblems,  the  angels  could  not  be  the  churches,  nor  any 
select  number,  or  collective  body  of  men,  because  they  are 
constantly  mentioned  as  single  persons,  and  by  a  title, 
which  was  well  known  to  bear  the  same  meaning  as  that  of 
aposde.  Both  are  applied  to  signify  a  messenger  of  God : 
an  apostle  as  one  sent  or  commissioned  to  carry  his  mes- 
sage, an  angel  as  employed  in  telling  or  declaring  that  mes- 
sage. The  name  of  angel,  therefore,  was  very  properly 
applied  to  those  who  immediately  succeeded  the  apostles, 
in  their  office  of  preaching  or  publishing  God's  will  to  the 
church  ;  and  when  St.  Paul  was  employed  in  preaching  the 
gospel  to  the  Galatians,  he  says,  "  they  received  him  as  an 
angel  of  God.^f  This  plainly  shows  that  these  angels  were 
not  only  single  persons,  but  entrusted  also  with  the  care 

*  Rev.  i.  20.  t  Oal.  iv.  14. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  155 

and  government  of  the  several  churches,  of  which  they 
were  called  the  angels:  which  will  still  appear  more  clearly, 
if  we  consider  the  subject  of  the  Epistles  addressed  to  them, 
and  the  characters,  which  are  there  given  of  them.  On 
account  of  the  authority  committed  to  them,  we  find  them 
praised  for  all  the  good,  and  blamed  for  all  the  evil,  which 
happened  in  their  churches.— The  angel  of  the  church  of 
Ephesus  is  commended,  because  "  he  could  not  bear  them 
that  were  evil,  and  had  tried  those  who  said  they  were 
apostles,  and  were  not  so."  Having  called  them  to  ac- 
count, and  examined  their  pretentions,  he  found  them  to 
be  no  other  than  "  liars,"  and  impostors,  and  therefore 
executed  the  discipline  of  the  church  against  them ;  in  doing 
which,  he  receives  approbation  for  discharging  his  duty. 
The  angel  of  the  church  in  Pergamos  is  reproved  for  not 
severely  censuring,  as  they  deserved,  those  who  were 
guilty  of  wicked  and  idolatrous  practices ;  from  which  it  is 
evident,  that  he  had  authority  to  correct  such  disorders. 
And  the  same  may  be  said  of  the  angel  of  Thyatira,  who 
is  blamed  for  "  suffering  Jezebel,  who  called  herself  a  pro- 
phetess, to  teach  and  seduce  the  servants  of  Christ,"  and 
so  lead  them  into  the  basest  idolatry.  The  angel  of  Sardis 
is  commanded  to  be  "  watchful,  and  to  strengthen  those 
who  were  ready  to  die  ;"  otherwise  our  Lord  threatens  to 
"  come  on  him  as  a  thief,  and  at  an  hour  which  he  should 
not  know ;"  plainly  alluding  to  what  he  had  formerly  said 
to  those  "  stewards,  whom  he  had  made  rulers  over  his 
household,  to  give  them  their  meat  in  due  season." 
.  All  this  is  abundantly  sufficient  to  show  the  office,  station 
and  authority  of  the  angels  of  the  seven  churches,  and  that 
we  need  not  scruple  to  call  them,  with  St.  Augustine,  and 
other  ancient  fathers,  "  the  bishops  and  presidents  of  these 
churches."-^     If  they  had  not  been  clothed  with  that  cha- 


*  See  this  matter  fully  handled  in  An  History  of  the  Go=icrnment  of  the 
Primitive  Church,  Ijfc.  by  Francis  Brokesby,  B.  D.  of  Cambridge,  and 


iiHQ  General  Defence  of  Epistopacy* 

l-acter,  it  would  be  difficult  to  reconcile  the  charges  give»i 
to  them  bv  St.  John  in  the  name  of  Christ,  with  that  princi- 
ple of  equity,  bv  which  we  are  sure  all  the  divine  proceed- 
ings ever  have  been  and  always  will  be  guided.  If  the  an- 
gels of  the  Asiatic  churches  had  been  invested  with  no  more 
permanent  power  than  what  is  committed  to  the  moderator 
of  a  presbytery  under  the  Scotch  establishment,  it  \vould 
have  been  hard  indeed  to  require  more  of  them  than  their 
office  allowed  them  to  perform,  or  to  condemn  them  for  not 
doing  what  they  had  no  right  or  authority  to  do.  This 
wouid  be  considered  as  such  flagrant  severity  and  injustice 
IR  any  human  judicatory,  that  we  cannot  possibly  suppose 
the  most  distant  tendency  towards  it,  in  his  divine  admi-^ 
niseration,  who  is  King  of  kings,  and  Lord  of  lords,  and 
as  "'  Judge  of  ail  the  earth,  will  certainly  do  right."  But 
if  the  angels  addressed  by  St.  John  had  really  the  same 
authorit}^  over  the  seven  churi^hes  of  Asia  that  was  com- 
mitted to  Timothy  and  Titus,  in  those  of  Ephesus  and 
Crete :  if  these  angels,  apostles,  or  bishops,  had  each  of 
them  a  right,  in  virtue  of  his  apostolic  commission,  to  take 
cognizance  of  false  and  heretical  doctrine,  to  admonish  the 
heretic,  and  in  case  of  his  obstinate  contempt  of  such  ad- 
monition, to  reject  him  from  the  communion  of  the  church: 
if  to  these  angels  only  pertained  the  power  of  ordaining 
presbvters  and  deacons  in  the  several  churches  committed 
to  their  care,  and  when  ordained,  of  appointing  their  ser- 
vices, inspecting  their  conduct,  and  seeing  that  every  thing 
was  done  decently,  and  so  as  to  promote  order  and  edifi- 
cation :  If  such  were  the  Episcopal  powers  committed  to 
these  angels  of  the  Asiatic  churches,  which,  we  have  already- 
seen,  had  been  committed  to  Timothy  in  Ephesus,  and 

in  A  Discourse  of  Church  Gmerntnent^  ijfc.  by-  Dr.  Potter,  who  has  shown* 
fi-om  the  most  early  accounts  of  the  primitive  church,  that  bishops  were 
settled  in  all  the  seven  churches  of  the  Proconsular  Asia,  of  which  Ephe- 
sus was  the  metropolis,  at  or  near  the  time  when  these  Epistles  were 
written  by  St.  John,  and  sent  to  the  angels,  or  bishops^,  of  these  churches. 


Omerai  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  157 

Titus  in  Crete,  the  careful  performance  of  the  duties  aris- 
ing from  such  an  important  trust  would,  no  doubt,  procure 
the  praise  of  their  heavenly  Master ;  while  inattention  and 
negligence,  neither  reproving  what  was  wrong,  nor  rebuk- 
ing the  wicked,  nor  expelling  the  incorrigible,  would  as 
certainly  expose  them  to  the  just  reprehension  of  that 
divine  Lord,  who  had  employed  his  servant  John  thus  to 
point  out  their  duty,  and  do  the  same  good  office  to  the 
bishops  of  the  seven  churches  in  Asia,  that  St.  Paul  had 
done  before  to  those  of  Ephesus  and  Crete* 

Our  Lecturer,  indeed,  after  all  he  had  said  to  show  the 
resemblance  between  St.  John's  bishops  in  Asia,  and  his 
own  moderators  in  Scotland,  acknowledges,  that  his  opi- 
nion "  is  only  the  most  likely  conjecture  of  all  he  has  seen 
on  this  article,  w^hich,  he  owns,  does  not  admit  so  positive 
a  proof  as  might  be  wished."  And  yet,  from  proof  so  im- 
perfect, and  evidence  merely  conjectural,  he  infers,  without 
the  least  hesitation,  that  "  it  was  doubtless  the  distinction  of 
one  pastor  in  every  church,  marked  by  this  apostle,  though 
not  made  by  any  who  had  written  before  him,  which  has  led 
TertuUian,  whose  publications  first  appeared  but  about  a 
century  after  the  apostles,  to  consider  him  as  the  institutor 
of  Episcopacy."^"  To  prove  that  this  was  Tertullian's  opi- 
nion, his  words  are  quoted  in  Latin,  with  the  translation 
given  of  them  by  Bingham,  in  his  Antiquities  of  the  Chris- 
tian  Church^\  which  is  called  "  a  palpable  misinterpretation 
of  our  antiquary,"  as  by  this  version,  according  to  our  au- 
thor, "  Bingham  avoids  showing,  what  is  extremely  plain 
from  the  words,  that  TertuUian  did  not  think  there  was 
any  subordination  in  the  pastors  of  the  churches  instituted 
by  the   other   apostles."J     But  this,  perhaps,  would  not 

*  Lecture  v.  t  Book  II.  chap.  i.  §  3. 

\  Tertuilian's  words  are,  as  taken  by  themselves  in  Dr.  Campbell's 
quotation,  "  Ordo  tamen  Episcop'irum  ad  originem  recensus  in  Joannem 
stabit  auctorem:"  (lib.  iv.  adv.  Marcionem)  which  Bingham  translates 
thus  :  "  The  oixler  of  bi&hops,  \vhen  it  is  traced  up  to  its  originulj  will 


1 58  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

have  appeared  so  "  extremely  plain"  as  Dr.  Campbell 
thought  it,  had  he  not  omitted  the  first  clause  of  the  sen- 
tence, with  which  the  words  he  has  quoted  have  a  neces- 
sary and  evident  connection.  In  his  controversy  with 
Marcion,  who  rejected  part  of  the  New  Testament  canon, 
Tertullian  had  been  proving  the  novelty  of  this  heretic's 
opinions,  from  his  being  unable  to  show  any  church  that 
embraced  them,  which  could  deduce  its  original  by  a  de- 
scent of  bishops  from  the  apostles ;  which  was  evidently 
the  case  with  those  churches,  in  which  the  sound  apostolic 
doctrine  was  still  retained.  For  "  let  us  see,"  says  he, 
*'  what  milk  the  Corinthians  drew  from  Paul,  by  what  rule 
the  Galatians  were  reclaimed,  what  the  Philippians,  Thes- 
salonians  and  Ephesians  read,  what,  likewise,  our  neigh- 
bour Romans  say,  to  whom  both  Peter  and  Paul  left  the 
gospel  sealed  with  their  blood.— We  have  also  churches 
founded  by  John,^  for  though  Marcion  rejects  his  apoca- 

be  found  to  have  St.  John  for  one  of  its  authors."  This  Dr.  Campbell 
proves  to  be  a  **  palpable  misinterpretation,"  by  the  following  argument. 
Had  Tertullian  said — "  Mundus  ad  originem  recensus,  in  Deum  stabit 
creatorem,"  would  Bingham  have  rendered  it — "  The  world,  when  it 
is  traced  up  to  its  original,  will  be  found  to  have  God  for  one  of  its  crea- 
tors ?  I  cannot  allow  myself  to  think  it.  Yet  the  interpolation,  in  ren- 
dering creatorem  one  of  its  creators,  is  not  more  flagrant  than  in  render- 
ing auctoreni  one  of  its  authors."  This  reflection  we  cannot  help  think- 
ing too  severe,  if  not  Jiagrantly  unjust.  For  Bingham  knew  well,  that 
Tertullian  did  not  allow  colleagues  to  God,  as  creator  of  the  world ;  but 
that  he  very  well  might  assign,  and  had  actually  assigned  colleagues  to 
John,  as  author  of  Episcopacy.  And  as  the  Latin  language  has  no  re- 
strictive article,  we  must  be  regulated  by  the  context,  in  rendering  aucto- 
rern  either  an  author,  thereby  with  Bingham  admitting  other  authors, 
or  the  zwthoY,  with  Dr.  Campbell,  thereby  restricting  the  sense  to  one, 
■which  certainly  was  not  Tertuliian's  meaning,  as  is  evident  from  the 
connection  of  this  quotation  with  the  preceding  part  of  the  passage 
from  which  it  is  taken. 

*  Habemus  et  Joannis  alumnas  ecclesias :  Nam  etsi  apocalypsim  ejus 
Marcion  respuit,  ordo  tatnen  Episcoporum  ad  originem  recensus,  in  Joan- 
nem  stabit  auctoiem ;  where  the  word  tanten  evidently  shows  that  the 
passage  must  have  a  connection  with  what  goes  immediately  before. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy »  i^9 

lypse,  yet  the  order  or  succession  of  bishops  in  these 
churches,  when  traced  up  to  its  original,  will  be  found  to 
have  John  for  its  author,"  as  being  the  ordainer  of  the  first 
bishops  in  the  churches  which  he  had  planted. 

This,  though  a  kind  of  paraphrase  of  his  words,  is 
evidently  Tertullian's  meaning,  and  agrees  exactly  with 
what  he  says  on  the  same  subject  in  another  of  his  works, 
which  we  have  already  had  occasion  to  mention,  his  "  Pre- 
scriptions against  Heretics,"  where  he  challenges  them  to 
''  produce  the  originals  of  their  churches,  and  show  the 
order  of  their  bishops  so  running  down  successively  from 
the  beginning,  as  that  every  first  bishop  among  them,  shall 
have  had  for  his  author  and  predecessor,  some  one  of  the 
apostles,  or  apostolic  men,  who  continued  with  the  apostles. 
For  in  this  manner  the  apostolic  churches  bring  down 
their  registers ;  as  the  church  of  Smyrna  from  Polycarp 
placed  there  by  John,  the  church  of  Rome  from  Clement 
ordained  by  Peter ;  and  so  do  the  rest  prove  their  apostolic 
original,  by  exhibiting  those  who  were  constituted  their 
bishops  by  the  apostles."*  Here  we  see  not  only  Tertul- 
lian  mentioning  the  circumstance  of  Peter  ordaining  Cle- 
ment at  Rome,  as  well  as  John  placing  Polycarp  at  Smyrna, 
both  of  whom  have  been  always  called  bishops ;  but  that 
the  rest  of  the  churches  also  had  bishops  constituted  by  the 
apostles ;  and  he  expressly  gives  the  very  appellation  of 
"author"  to  every  apostle,  or  apostolic  man,  who  had  founded 
churches  any  where.  Had  Dr.  Campbell  acted  fairly  with 
his  "  young  friends,  whom  he  had  just  before  been  wam- 

*  Tertullian's  words  are  these :  "  Edant  ergo  origenes  ecclesiarum 
suarum ;  evolvant  ordinem  Episcoporum  suorum  ita  per  successiones  ab 
initio  decurrentem,  ut  primus  ille  Episcopus  aliquem  ex  apostolis,  vel 
apostolicis  viris,  qui  tamen  cum  apostolis  perseveraverint,  habuerit  auc- 
torein,  et  antecessorem ;  hoc  enim  modo  ecclesise  apostolicse  census  suos 
deferunt,  sicut  Smyrnaeorum  ecclesia  habens  Polycarpum  ab  Joanne  con- 
locacv.m  refert ;  sicut  Romanorum  Cleimentem  a  Petro  ordinatum  edit ; 
proinde  utique  et  ceterse  exhibent,  quos  ab  apostolis  in  Episcopatum  con- 
stitutes, apostolici  seminis  traduces  habeant."     Dc  prescript.  C.  32. 


160  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy , 

ing  to  revere  truth  above  all  things,  wherever  they  found 
it,  and  be  always  open  to  conviction,"  he  would  have  laid 
before  them  this  passage,  which  I  have  now  quoted,  as 
well  as  the  other,   and  left  them  to  determine  for  them- 
selves, without  "  prejudice  or  prepossession,  whether  there 
was  any  good  ground  to  conclude,  that  TertuUian  "  consi- 
dered tlie  apostle  John  as  the  institutor  of  Episcopacy." 
And  yet,  had  the  case  been  really  so,  the  cause  of  Episco- 
pac)''  could  have  received  no  harm  from  it,  when  we  find 
even  this  learned  adversary  acknowledging  it  to  be  "  more 
likely,  that  John,  in  the  direction  of  the  Episdes  to  the 
seven   churches,   availed   himself  of  a  distinction,  which 
had   subsisted  from   the  beginning,   than  that   either  the 
church  was  new-modelled  by  this  apostle,  or  that  the  dif- 
ferent apostles  adopted  different  plans."*    This  last  suppo- 
sition, indeed,  appears  to  us  so  very  unlikely,  we  might  even 
say  incredible,  that  we  have  no  scruple  to  rest  the  institu- 
tion of  Episcopacy  on  the  ground  which  is  here  assigned 
to  it ;  because  we  are  certain  that  all  the  apostles  modelled 
the  church  on  one  and  the  same  plan,  even  on  the  plan  of 
that  distinction^  which  had  subsisted  from  the  beginnings 
and  always  "  implied"  that  very  "  diiference  in  order  and 
power,"  which  our  Professor  was  so  unwilling  to  acknow- 
ledge, and  laboured  so  earnesdy  to  make  his  pupils  disbe* 
lieve. 

In  the  course  of  these  labours,  we  have  now  followed 
him  through  such  of  his  lectures  as  seem  to  have  more 
immediate  reference  to  the  authority  of  scripture,  in  ascer- 
taining the  original  constitution  and  government  of  the 
Christian  church:  a  subject  on  which  the  inspired  writers 
give  us  as  much  clear  information  as  is  perfectly  sufficient 
to  guide  us  aright,  if  we  will  be  directed  by  it  in  this  in- 
quiry; and  "  from  which,"  it  is  our  opinion,  "  that  we  can 
with   certainty  form  a  judgment   concerning  the  entire 

*  Lecture  v: 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  161 

model  of  the  apostolic  church."     Dr.  Campbell,  however, 
thinks  otherwise,  and  represents  those  passages  of  scrip- 
ture which  have  a  reference  to  this  important  subject,  in  a 
light  very  different  from  that  in  which  the  friends  of  Epis- 
copacy have  been  taught  to  view  them.     To  whom  then 
shall  we  have  recourse,  as  most  likely  to  point  out  where 
the  truth  lies  between  such  jarring  opinions  ?    To  whom 
indeed  can  we  apply  for  direction  in  judging  of  a  matter 
of  fact,    such  as  the  apostolic  constitution  of  the  church, 
hut  to  those  contemporary  or  early  writers,  who,  "  as  to 
what  depends  on  testimony^''   in  explaining  any  part  of 
ficripture  which  is  thought  to  be  doubtful,  "  are  in  every 
c^se,  wherein  no  particular  passion  can  be  suspected  to  have' 
swayed  them,  to  be  preferred  before  modem  interpreters  or 
annotators  ?"     This  is  the  account  which,  in  a  work  pub- 
lished by  himself,*  Dr.  Campbell  gives  of  the  credit  that 
is  due  to  those  who  are  called  the  fathers  of  the  church ; 
and  then  he  adds — "  I  say  not  this,  to  insinuate  that  we 
can  relv  more  on  their  integrity,  but  to  signify,  that  with 
them  many  points  were  a  subject  of  testimo7iy,  which,  with 
modem  critics,  are  matter  merely  of  conjecture^  or,  at  most, 
of  abstruse  and  critical  discussion.     And  every  body  must 
he  sensible,  that  the  direct  testimony  of  a  plain  man,  in  a 
matter  which  comes  within  the  sphere  of  his  knowledge,  is 
more  to  be  regarded  than  the  subtile  conjectures  of  an  able 
scholar,  who  does  not  speak  from  knowledge,  but  gives  the 
conclusions  he  has  drawn  from  his  own  precarious  reason- 
ings, or  from  those  of  others." 

After  such  a  concession  in  favour  of  the  fathers,  limited 
as  it  is  in  some  points,  we  shall  most  readily  listen  to  their 
evidence  in  the  case  before  us,  being  well  assured,  that 
the  government  of  the  church  under  which  they  lived,  was 
a  matter  that  "  came  within  the  sphere  of  their  knowledge," 
and  that  we  cannot  possibly  suspect  all  the  Christian  wri- 

*  See  his  Preliminary  Dissertations,  Sec.  p.  106,  XQ7. 
21 


162  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

ters  of  that  character,  to  have  been  "  swayed  by  any  parti- 
cular passion,"  to  give  a  false  account  of  whait  must  have 
been  generally  well  known,  and  in  a  case  where  the  false- 
hood could  have  been  so  easily  detected. 

The  first  of  these  "  ancient  testimonies,"  which  our  Lec- 
turer brings  forward,  is  taken,  he  says,  "  from  the  most  re- 
spectable remains  we  have  of  Christian  antiquity,  next  to  the 
inspired  writings;"  and  then  adds,^  "  The  piece  I  allude  to 
is  the  first  Epistle  of  Clemens  Romanus  to  the  Corinthians, 
as  it  is  commonly  styled,  but  as  it  st}^les  itself,  the  Epistle 
of  the  church  of  God  at  Rome,  to  the  church  of  God  at 
Corinth  :"■— From  which  inscription  of  the  epistle.  Dr. 
Campbell  would  no  doubt  infer,  aS  Blondel  had  done  before 
him,'!'  that  at  the  time  when  it  was  written,  both  the  church 
of  Rome  and  that  of  Corinth  v/ere  governed  by  a  college 
of  presbyters,  or  rather  by  the  people  at  large  j  since  the 
whole  church  at  Rome  wrote  to  the  whole  church  at 
Corinth,  without  making  any  distinction  between  clergy 
and  laity. — Yet  Blondel  could  not  but  know,  that  such  a 
distinction  is  expressly  mentioned  in  the  epistle  itself ;  and 
his  follower,  Dr.  Campbell,  is  at  no  small  pains  to  show,  that 
the  passage  in  which  it  is  so  mentioned,  being  "  introduced 
by  Clemens,  when  speaking  of  the  Jewish  priesthood,  and 
not  of  the  Christian  ministry,  aifords  no  foundation  for  the 
distinction  that  was  long  after  his  time  introduced."  How 
far  this  reasoning  is  just,  will  appear  from  considering  the 
purpose,  for  which  the  Jewish  priesthood  is  spoken  of  on 
this  occasion,  and  the  situation  of  those  on  whom  St.  Cle- 
ment thus  presses  the  necessity  of  ecclesiastical  subordina- 
tion. 


*  Lecture  Iv. 

t  Yet  Blondel  acknowledges  that  this  very  Cltment  was  generally  be- 
lieved to  have  been  the  second  bishop  after  St.  Peier  in  the  church  of 
Rome. — His  words  are,  "  Plerique  Latinorum  (Hieronymo  teste)  secun- 
dum posL  Petrum  fuisse  putaverunt,  ut  ante  annum  domini  dS  ad  Homanjp 
eccksijc  clavum  sedisse  neccsse  sit."    Apologia  p.o  Sent.  Hieron.  p.  9. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  163 

A  fresh  spirit  of  schism  and  division  had  broke  out  in  the 
church  at   Corinth,   similar  to  that  which  St.  Paul   was 
obliged  to  repress,  when  he  wrote  his  first  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians :    And  now  his  fellow  labourer,  St.  Clement, 
making  use  of  some  of  the  powerful  arguments  which  the 
apostle  had  formerly  urged,  brings  the  matter  home  to  the 
point  in   question,  by  showing  how  the  members  of  the 
church  at   Corinth  ought  all  to  conduct  themselves  in  a 
quiet  and  peaceable  manner,  each  within  his  proper  station  ; 
thus  humbly  imitating  the  order  and  harmony  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  Jewish  church,  the  instituted  type  or  figure  of 
the  church  of  Christ.     "  Seeing  then,"  says  St.  Clement, 
that  "  these  things  are  manifest  unto  us,  it  will  behove 
us  to  take  care,  that  looking  into  the  depths  of  the  divine 
knowledge,  we  do  all  things  in  order,  whatsoever  our  Lord 
has  commanded  us"to  do  :  and  particularly,  that  we  perform 
our  offerings  and  service  to  God,  at  their  appointed  seasons 
—and  by  the  persons  that  minister  unto  him.     For  the 
chief  priest  has  his  proper  services,   and  to  the  priests 
their  proper  place  is  appointed,  and  to  the  Levites  belong 
their  proper  ministrations  (or  deaconships),  and  the  layman 
is  confined  within  the  bounds  of  what  is  commanded  to 
laymen.     Let  every  one  of  you,  brethren,  bless  God  in  his 
proper  station,  not  exceeding  the  rule  that  is  appointed  to 
him."     When  we  consider  the  scope  and  design  of  this 
passage,  we  must  be  convinced,  that  though  the  venerable 
writer  is  speaking  of  the  economy  of  the  Jewish  church,  it 
is  only  in  the  way  of  allusion,  and  for  drawing  the  neces- 
sary inference,  with  regard  to  the  Christian  ministry.    But 
neither  the  allusion  would  have  been  proper,  nor  the  infer- 
ence just,  if  the  distinctions  of  ecclesiastical  order  in  the 
Christian   church   had  not  corresponded  to  those  in  the 
Jewish,  as  they  are  here  described  by  St.  Clement,  for  the 
sake   of  pointing  out  the  resemblance,   and  showing  the 
proper  conclusion  which  was  to  be  drawn  from  it. 

Yet  our  Professor  endeavours  to  make  this  ancient  author 


|:64  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

contradict  himself,  by  quoting  a  passage  from  hirii,  in 
which,  as  he  thinks,  the  orders  of  the  Christian  ministry 
ar*:-  represented  as  but  two,  and  so  not  the  same  in  number 
with  those  of  the  Jewish.  It  was  for  the  same  purpose 
that  Blondel  made  use  of  this  passage,  in  which  St.  Cle- 
ment says — that  "  the  apostles  having  preached  the  gospel 
through  countries  and  cities,  constituted  the  first  fruits 
of  their  conversions,  whom  they  approved  by  the  spirit, 
bishops  and  deacons  of  those  who  should  believe :"  From 
which  words  it  is  inferred,  that  the  apostles,  in  planting 
churches  through  countries  and  cities,  ordained  but  two 
orders  to  take  care  of  them.*  And  may  it  not  then  be 
asked,  what  were  the  ordamers  themsehes  ^  Were  they 
of  no  order  in  the  church  ?  Or  were  they  of  the  same 
order  with  either  of  these  whom  they  ordained  ?  From 
the  answer  that  must  be  given  to  these  question,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  there  were  three  orders  in  the  church,  at  the  time 
when  the  apostles  ordained  the  two  inferior  orders,  whom 
St.  Clement,  in  the  current  language  of  the  apostolic  age, 
calls  bishops  and  deacons,  and  thereby  alludes  to  a  text, 
which  he  quotes  frorn  Isaiah,|  as  rendered  in  the  Greek 
translation — -"  I  will  constitute  their  bishops  in  righteous- 
ness, and  their  deacons  in  faith."  Whether  this  be  a  just 
translation,  or  a  proper  application  of  the  prediction.  Dr. 
Campbell  acknowledges  is  not  the  question. — "  It  is 
enough,"  he  says,  "  that  it  evinces  what  Clement's  notion 
was  of  the  established  ministers  then  in  the  church."  And 
his  notion,  we  have  no  doubt,  was  the  same  with  what  we 
have  seen  prevailed  at  the  time  when  he  wrote  this  Epistle 
^o  the  Corinthians;  that  under  the  apostles,  the  care  or 

*  See  the  same  inference  drawn,  and  the  very  sanie  reasoning  made 
use  of  to  support  it,  in  An  Enquiry  into  the  Constitutioii,  iSfc.  of  the  Primi- 
tive  Churc/j,  which  was  so  completely  anrAvered  in  An  Original  Drau^bt 
of  the  Primiti'ue  Church,  by  a  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Enpjand,  that 
it  is  said  to  have  brouglit  over  the  Enquirer  to  this  author's  opini'^". 

t  Isaiah  Ix.  17. 


Gmeral  DefeiKe  vf  Episcopacy,  165 

oversight  of  certain  portions  of  the  flock  of  Christ  was 
eommitted  to  inferior  overseers  and  ministers,  whom  we 
l*ave  called  bishops  and  deacons,  till  it  was  thought  proper 
to  put  them  under  the  government  of  persons  invested 
with  apostolical  power,  such  as  Clemens  himself  possessed 
and  exercised  in  the  church  of  Rome,  of  which  he  is  al- 
ways distinguished  as  bishops  and  by  another  writer  of  the 
same  name,  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  is  expressly  called 
the  "  apostle  Clemens."^  This  is  all  that  can  be  justly  in- 
ferred  from  the  passage  of  his  epistle,  quoted  by  Dr.  Camp- 
bell ;  which  was  not  at  all  intended  to  point  out  particularly 
the  number  of  orders  in  the  church ;  and  could  no  more 
be  considered  as  setting  aside  the  superior  rank  and  autho- 
rity of  bishops,  than  the  common  language  of  both  Jewish 
and  Christian  writers  could  be  understood  as  excluding  the 
high  priest,  when  they  mentioned  the  Jewish  ministry 
under  the  general  appellation  of  priests  and  Levites.f 

The  next  testimony  \^•hich  our  author  produces,  to  show 
that,  in  the  primitive  times,  there  were  only  two  orders  of 
ministers  in  the  church,  is  that  of  Polycarp,  bishop  of 
Smvrna,  who  is  said  by  Irenseus  to  have  been  taught  by  the 
apostles,  and  to  have  convei-sed  with  many,  who  had  seen 
our  Saviour;  to  which  account  it  is  added,  that  Irenasus 
himself  had  seen  him,  in  his  younger  days,  and  knew  him 
to  have  been  constituted  bishop  of  Smyrna  by  the  apostles. 
One  might  suppose,  that  when  the  adversaries  of  Episco- 
pacy bring  forward  such  a  witness  as  this  in  support  of 
their  cause,  they  had  certainly  discovered  in  his  writings, 
some  clear,  undoubted  evidence,  on  which  might  be  justly 
founded  the  irrejection  of  the  Episcopal  order.     But,  in- 

*  Strom.  lib.  iv. 

t  In  some  parts  of  the  English  liturgy  the  clergy  are  prayed  for  under 
the  twofold  distinction  of  "  bishops  and  curates."  But  no  person  will 
hence  infer,  that  the  church  of  England  has  but  Hvo  orders  of  clergy, 
when  she  has  so  carefully  provided  for  the  "  making,  ordaining  and 
consecrating  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons." 


166  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

stead  of  this,  all  that  we  meet  with  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians,  is  a  very  brief  intimation  of  "  their  being  sub- 
ject to  the  presbyters  and  deacons,  as  unto  God  and  Christ ; 
while,  at  the  same  time,  the  very  introduction  to  the  epistle 
marks  the  superior  character  of  the  writer,  in  these  words 
— "  Polycarp,  and  the  presbyters  that  are  with  him,  to  the 
church  of  God  which  is  at  Philippi."^  And  if  only  the 
presbyters  and  deacons  of  that  church  are  mentioned  in  the 
words  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell,!  it  might  be  owing  to  the 
Episcopal  charge  being  vacant  at  the  time  when  this  epistle 
was  written,  as  was  the  case  at  Rome,  when  Cyprian,  bishop 
of  Carthage,  wrote  his  letters  to  the  presbyters  of  that  place. 
But  what  shall  we  say  of  our  Lecturer's  asserting  it,  as 
"  evident  from  the  above  quotation,  that  Polycarp  knew  of 
no  Christian  minister  superior  to  the  presbyters,"  when, 
together  with  his  own,  he  earnestly  recommended,  and  actur 
ally  sent  to  the  Philippians,  at  their  desire,  those  very 
epistles  of  Ignatius,  in  which  the  office  and  the  duties  of 
a  bishop,  as  distinguished  from  those  of  the  presbyters,  are 
so  fully  and  frequently  insisted  on,  that  Polycarp  might 
well  think  it  unnecessary  for  him  to  say  any  thing  farther  on 
that  subject?  Being  himself  a  bishop,  and  writing  in  that 
character  to  the  Philippians,  he  might  justly  consider  the 
epistles  of  Ignatius,  which  they  were  so  desirous  to  see,  as 
perfectly  sufficient  to  establish  the  regard  which  was  dUe  to 
the  Episcopal  office,  especially  as  one  of  these  episdes  was 

*  If  the  author  of  this  epistle  had  not  been  distinguished  by  a  supe- 
rior dignity  of  office,  we  could  hardly  suppose  it  consistent  with  his  mo- 
desty and  self-denial,  to  have  named  himself  only,  and  made  no  mention 
of  his  brethren,  but  by  the  general  name  of  presbyters  :  A  circumstance, 
■which  obliged  even  Blondel  to  make  the  following  remark — "  Id  tamen 
in  S.  Mavtyris  epistola  peculiare  apparet,  quod  eam  privatim  suo  et  presbyte- 
rorum  nomine  ad  Philippensium  fraternitatem  dedit,  ac  sibi  quandam  supra 
pi-esbyteros — vtvi^oxav  reservasse  videtur,  ut  jam  mm  in  Episcopali  apice 
constitutum  reliquos  Smyrnensium  presbyteros  gradu  swperasse  conjicere 
liceat."     Apol.  p.  14. 

t  Lecture  iv. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^  167 

addressed  to  himself  as  bishop  of  Smyrna,  and  another  of 
them  to  the  church  of  that  place,  exhorting  them  to  be  obe- 
dient to  their  bishop,  and  to  do  nothing  of  what  belongs  to 
the  church  without  his  consent. 

Indeed,  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  bear  such  strong  undeni- 
able evidence  to  the  existence  of  three  distinct  orders  in  the 
Christian  ministry,  known  by  the  name  of  bishops,  pres- 
byters and  deacons,  that  there  is  no  possibility  of  evading 
the  force  of  this  positive  testimony,  but  by  boldly  affirming, 
diat  the  epistles  themselves  are  spurious,  or  have  been  so 
interpolated  by  various  transcribers,  as  to  leave  but  a  very 
small,  if  any  degree  of  credit  due  to  them.  This  has  been 
the  pretence,  in  one  shape  or  other,  of  all  the  advocates  for 
presbyterian  parity,  from  the  days  of  Calvin  do^vn  to  Dr. 
Campbell ;  and  we  have  only  to  take  notice  of  the  same 
arguments,  dressed  out  perhaps  in  different  forms,  according 
to  the  taste  and  abihty  of  the  several  writers,  who  have  pre- 
sumed to  attack  those  venerable  remains  of  ecclesiastical 
antiquity  contained  in  the  epistles  of  St.  Ignatius. — It  is 
very  suitable,  however,  to  our  present  design,  to  show  all 
proper  attention  to  what  has  been  said  on  this  subject ;  and 
we  shall  begin  with  observing,  that  Ignatius,  bishop  of 
Antioch,.  having  presided  over  that  church  with  admirable 
prudence  and  constancy,  for  almost  forty  years,  was  at  last 
condemned  to  suffer  death,  about  the  tenth  year  of  the 
reign  of  the  Emperor  Trajan,  and  on  the  way  to  his  mar- 
tyrdom at  Rome,  wrote  his  epistles  to  the  several  churches 
to  which  they  are  addressed.  That  some  such  epistles  were 
written  by  Ignatius,  is  evident  from  the  account,  to  which 
we  have  just  now  referred,  as  given  by  Polycarp  in  his 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  in  which  he  tells  them — ^*  The 
epistles  of  Ignatius,  which  he  wrote  unto  us,"  (that  is,  to 
himself,  and  to  the  church  at  Smyrna)  "  together  with  what 
others  of  his  have  come  to  our  hands,  we  have  sent  to 
you,  according  to  your  order,  which  are  subjomed  to  this 
epistle  ;  by  which  ye  may  be  greatly  profited  \  for  they  treat 


168  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy » 

of  faith,  and  patience,  and  of  all  things  that  pertain  to  edi- 
fication in  the  Lord  Jesus."*  To  this  account  from  Poly- 
earp,  we  may  add  that  which  is  given  by  his  disciple  Ire- 
naeus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  who,  as  Eusebius  assures  us,  "  was 
not  ignorant  of  the  martyrdom  of  St.  Ignatius,  and  men- 
tions his  epistles  in  these  words — Thus  one  of  our  brethren 
being  condemned  for  maintaining  the  faith,  to  be  exposed 
to  the  wild  beasts,  said— -I  am  the  wheat  of  God,  and  shall 
be  ground  by  the  teeth  of  wild  beasts,  that  I  may  be  found 
the  pure  bread  of  Christ."t  Which  words,  thus  quoted  by 
Irenaeus,  are  found  in  the  epistle  of  St.  Ignatius  to  the  Ro- 
mans. To  this  undoubted  testimony,  may  be  added  that  of 
Origen,  who  was  bom  before  Irenseus  died,  and  has  left  us 
two  quotations  from  the  episdes  of  Ignatius,  which  are 
both  to  be  found  in  our  present  copies.  And  Eusebius,  in 
his  ecclesiastical  history ,J  gives  us  a  full  account  of  these 
epistles,  and  tells  us  where  the  holy  martyr  wrote  them. 

Such  are  the  testimonies,  which,  together  with  those  of 
Athanasius,  Jerome,  and  many  others,  serve  to  prove,  that 
the  epistles  of  Ignatius,  as  published  by  archbishop  Usher, 
in  an  ancient  Latin  version,  and  soon  after  by  Isaac  Vossius 
in  the  original  Greek,  from  a  manuscript  in  the  Florentine 
librar}^,  are  undoubtedly  the  genuine  epistles  of  that  primi- 
tive martyr :  a  point,  which  has  been  so  clearly  established 
by  the  learned  Dr.  Pearson,  late  bishop  of  Chester,  in  his 
admirable  work  on  this  subject,  as  to  leave  room  for  no 
objection  or  argument  of  any  weight  to  appear,  against  the 
genuineness  of  these  epistles,  which  has  not  been  already 
refuted  in  his  unanswerable  vindication  of  them.||  If, 
therefore,  it  shall  still  be  urged  by  such  writers  as  Dr. 
Campbell,  against  the  authority  of  Ignatius,  that  "  we 
cannot  with  safety  found  a  decision  on   an  author,   with 

*  See  Archbishop  Wake's  Translation  of  the  Genuine  Epistles  of  tht 
Apostolical  Fathers,  p.  59. 

f  Irenaeus  Contra  Her.  lib.  v.  cap.  28.  \  Lib.  Hi.  c.  36. 

II  See  Viiulici.s  Ignatiana,  by  Dr.  Pearson. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacip  d6^ 

whose  works  transcribers  have  made  so  free,"  we  think  it 
sufficient  to  reply  in  the  words  of  archbishop  Wake,  "  that 
)S.  it  be  meant,  that  the  same  has  happened  to  the  epistles  of 
Ignatius,  as  has  done  to  all  other  ancient  writings,  that  let- 
ters or  words  have  been  mistaken,  either  by  the  careless- 
ness or  ignorance  of  the  transcribers,  we  see  no  reason 
why  we  should  deny  that  to  have  befallen  these  epistles, 
which  has  been  the  misfortune  of  all  other  pieces  of  the  like 
antiquity.  This,  therefore,  it  has  been  often  declared,^ 
that  neither  do  we  contend  about ;  nor  can  any  one,  who 
i^eads  the  best  copies  we  have  of  them  with  any  care  or 
judgment,  make  any  doubt  about  it.  But  as  for  any  large 
interpolations,  such  as  were  those  of  the  copies  before  ex- 
tant ;'[■  for  any  changes  or  mistakes  that  may  call  in  question 
either  the  credit  or  authority  of  these  epistles,  as  we  now 
have  them,  we  utterly  deny  that  there  are  any  such  in  these 
last  editions  of  them  :"J  nor,  we  may  add,  has  even  the 
Ipamed  Dr.  Campbell  offered  any  thing  to  induce  us  to 
believe  that  there  are.  He  has  indeed  acknowledged,  that 
"  the  epistles  in  question  ought  not  to  be  rejected  in  the 
lump,"  but  still  insists  "  that  undue  freedoms  have  been 
used,  even  with  the  purest  of  them,  by  some  over-zealous 
partizan  of  the  priesthood."  And  if  we  should  maintain, 
that  this"  is  an  undue  freedom  used  by  "  ail  over-zealous 
partizan"  of  presbytery,  we  could  bring  forward  as  much 
proof  in  support  of  our  assertion,  as  he  has  produced  for 
the  purpose  of  stamping  the  mark  of  forgery,  or  interpo- 
lation, on  the  epistles  of  Ignatius.  All  that  he  has  offered 
like  argument  on  the  subject,||  amounts  at  most,  even  by 
h|^  own  account,  to  "  raising  suspicions  of  their  authenti- 
city. Or  at  least  of  their  integrity ;"  but  he  surely  knew, 
that  it  requires  more  than  suspidon^  however  strong,  to  fix 
forgery,  or  prove  interpolation  in  any  writing. 

*  Vossii  annot.  passim.  Pearson  Vind.  Ignat.  Proleg.  p.  20. 
"  f  That  is,  before  those  of  Usher  and  Vossius. 
t  See  Archbishop  Wake's  Translation,  &c.  p.  39.        II  Le«t«re  vi 
32 


1 70  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

What  seems  to  be  the  greatest  ground  of  offence,  as  well 
as  of  suspicion,  is  the  "  nauseous  repetition,"  as  he  calls  it, 
"  of  obedience  and  subjection  to  the  bishop,  presbyters, 
and  deacons,  to  be  found  in  the  letters  of  Ignatius."  But 
has  he  shown,  of  even  attempted  to  show,  that  there  are 
any  manuscripts,  or  editions  of  letters,  in  which  this  offen- 
sive "  nauseous  repetition"  is  not  to  be  met  with  ?  No : 
but  the  sentiment  itself,  and  the  manner  in  which  it  is  ex- 
pressed, are  so  different  from  the  spirit  and  style  of  the 
apostolic  age,  as  to  afford  "  strong  presumptive  evidence 
against  the  entire  genuineness  of  the  letters  in  question." 
Such  is  the  judgment  which  Professor  Campbell  wished 
his  pupils  to  form  on  this  controverted  point  j*  very  differ- 
ent indeed  from  the  opinion  delivered  by  one,  who  must 
be  acknowledged  a  no  less  competent  judge  of  their  merit, 
even  the  learned  translator  of  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  into 
English,  who  assures  us,  that  "  there  is  nothing  in  these 
epistles,  as  we  now  have  them,  either  unworthy  of  the 
spirit  of  Ignatius,  or  the  character  that  antiquity  has  given 
us  of  them ;  nothing  disagreeing  to  the  time  in  which  he 
wrote,  or  that  should  seem  to  speak  them  to  have  been  the 
work  of  any  later  author.  Now  this,  as  it  hardly  ever 
fails  to  discover  such  pieces  as  are  falsely  imposed  upon 
ancient  authors;  so  there  not  appearing  any  thing  of  this 
kind  in  these  epistles,  inclines  us  the  more  readily  to  con- 
clude, that  they  were  undoubtedly  written  by  him,  whose 
they  are  said  to  be."t  And  when  we  are  thus  well  assured 
that  they  are  so,  and  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  this 

*  It  is  worthy  of  notice,  how  differently  Dr.  Campbell  himself  ex- 
presses his  opinion  of  the  Ignatian  epistles,  in  the  preface  to  his  transla- 
tion cf  St.  John's  gospel,  where  he  says — "  There  are  evident  refer- 
rences  to  this  gospel,  though  without  naming  the  author,  in  some  epis- 
tles of  Ignatius,  the  authenticity  of  which  is  strenuously  maintained  by 
bishop  Pearson,  and  other  critics  of  name — It  was  in  the  beginning  of 
the  second  (century)  when  the  above  mentioned  Ignatius  wrote  his  epis- 
tles."—Dr.  Campbell's  Translation  of  the  Gospels  is  dedicated  to  a  liiskop. 

t  See  Archbishop  Wake's  Translation,  p.  34. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  i.7i 

is  a  true  and  just  account  of  their  character,  we  need  not 
be  much  moved  by  any  of  those  objections,  which  the  anti- 
Episcopal  writers  have  made  to  their  authenticit}^ ;  one  of 
^hich  Dr.  Campbell  states  to  be,  that  "  their  style,  in  many 
places,  is  not  suited,"  as  he  expresses  it,  "  to  the  simplicity' 
of  the  times  immediately  succeeding  the  times  of  the  apos- 
tles ;"  and  then,  after  enlarging  a  litde  on  this  topic,  in  a  way 
that  only  seems  like  reasoning,  and  has  but  the  appearance 
of  argument,  he  adds,  "  but  it  is  not  the  style  only  which 
has  raised  suspicion,  it  is  chiefly  the  sentiments."  And 
the  chief  sentiment,  which  he  has  selected  to  justify  this 
suspicion,  is  expressed  in  the  following  words  of  Ignatius 
to  Polycarp — "  Attend  to  the  bishop,  that  God  may  attend 
to  you.  I  pledge  my  soul  for  theirs,  who  are  subject  to 
the 'bishop,  presbyters,  and  deacons.  Let  my  part  in  God 
be  with  them." 

After  quoting  these  words,  our  Lecturer  asks — "  Was 
It  the  doctrine  of  Ignatius,  that  all  that  is  necessary  to  sal- 
vation in  a  Christian,  is  an  implicit  subjection  to  the  bi- 
shop, presbyters,  and  deacons  t  Be  it,  that  he  means  only 
in  spiritual  matters.  Is  this  the  style  of  the  apostles  to 
their  Christian  brethren  ?"  Yes ;  we  answer,  it  is  the  very 
style  even  of  that  great  apostle,  to  whom  he  immediately 
refers,  and  who,  after  giving  this  command  to  the  believing 
Hebrews — "  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and 
submit  yourselves,"  gives  also  the  reason  and  object  of  his 
command-—"  for  they  watch  for  your  souls,  as  they  that 
must  give  account,  that  they  may  do  it  with  joy,  and  not 
with  grief  ;"^  that  is,  may  give  a  joyful  account  of  your 
obedience  and  submission  to  them,  when  they  are  speaking 
to  you  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and  teaching  you  to  observe 
all  things  whatsoever  he  has  commanded.  For  it  was  only 
When  the  bishop,  with  his  presbyters  and  deacons,  .were 
thus  employed  in  the  careful  discharge  of  their  duty  as 

*  Heb.  xiii.  ir. 


1 7'2  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy ^ 

ambassadors  for  Christ,  that  Ignatius  required  the  Christ 
tians  at  Smyrna  to  hearken  and  attend  to  them  ;  and  if  they 
did  so,  he  might  very  safely  assure  them  of  salvation  ;  just 
as  we  find  two  of  our  Lord's  apostles  quoting  that  passage 
of  scripture  which  saith-r— "  Whosoever  shall  call  upon  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  shall  be  saved  ;"^  where  "  calling  on 
the  name  of  the  Lord,"  must  necessarily  imply  faith  in  that 
name,  which  is  the  "  only  one  given  under  heaven,  whereby 
we  must  be  saved,"  and  obedience  to  that  Lord,  "  who 
became  the  author  of  eternal  salvation  unto  all  them  that 
obey  him."  Yet  the  same  St.  Paul,  who  said  of  himself 
and  his  fellow  apostles-—"  We  preach  not  ourselves,  but 
Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  and  ourselves  your  servants  for 
Jesus'  sake,"  could  also  represent  himself  as  a  humble  in- 
strument of  that  salvation,  which  this  Jesus  had  purchased, 
when,  speaking  as  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  he  said,  on 
that  account,  "  I  magnify  mine  office,  if  by  any  means  I 
may  provoke  to  emulation,  them  which  are  my  flesh,  and 
might  save  some  of  t/ion,^^^ 

In  the  same  light  we  find  him  representing  his  fellow 
labourer  Timothy,  when  having  pointed  out  what  things  he 
was  to  "  command  and  teach,"  he  exhorts  him  to  "  continue 
in  them,  and  to  take  heed  unto  himself,  and  unto  the 
doctrine  ;  for  in  doing  this,"  says  he,  "  thou  shalt  both  save 
thyself,  and  them  that  hear  theeJ'''X  Where  then  was  the 
presumption  or  impropriety  in  Ignatius  "  thus  exhibiting 
the  pattern,  which  had  been  given  by  that  great  apostle," 
and  in  the  name  of  his  blessed  Master,  promising  salvation 
to  those  who  should  hearken  to  the  doctrine,  and  follow 
the  directions  delivered  by  his  commissioned  servants,  and 
agreeably  to  his  holy  will  ?  If  this  was  the  "  predominant 
scope"  of  Ignatius,  in  the  letters  ascribed  to  him,  does  he 
deserve  the  imputation  of  "  preaching  himself  and  other 


*  Acts  ii.  21,  and  Rom.  x,  IS.  f  Rom.  xi.  13,  U. 

\  1  Tim.  iv.  16. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  1  /o 

ecclesiastics  ?"  And  was  it  fair  to  say,  as  Dr.  Campbell  has 
said,  that  "  the  only  consistent  declaration  which  would 
have  suited  the  author  of  these  epistles,  must  have  been 
die  reverse  of  Paul's.  We  preach  not  Christ  Jesus  the 
Lord,  but  so  far  only  as  may  conduce  to  the  increase  of  our 
influence,  and  the  exaltation  of  our  power ;  nay,  for  an 
object  so  important,  we  are  not  ashamed  to  preach  up 
ourselves  your  masters,  with  unbounded  dominion  over 
your  faith,  and  consequently  over  both  soul  and  body." 

Where  are  the  words  of  Ignatius  to  be  found  that  can 
bear  such  a  harsh  interpretation?  We  have  read  all  his 
epistles  from  beginning  to  end,  but  have  not  met  with  a 
single  expression  in  them  that  can  justly  be  said  to  lead 
to  such  an  unworthy  conclusion.  On  the  contrary,  we  see 
his  humility  no  less  conspicuous  than  his  zeal,  when  we 
find  him  declaring  to  the  Magnesians — ^"  As  one  of  the 
least  among  you,  I  am  desirous  to  forewarn  you,  that  ye 
fall  not  into  the  snares  of  vain  doctrine  ;"  and  to  the  Ro- 
mans— "  I  do  not^  as  Peter  and  Paul  command  you.  They 
were  apostles,  I  a  condemned  man ;  they  were  free,  but  I 
am  even  to  this  day  a  servant-''*  thereby  alluding  to  his  ap- 
proaching sufferings  as  the  conclusion  of  his  service^  and 
acting  not  at  all  consistently  with  that  affectation  of  power, 
that  desire  of  worldly  exaltation,  which,  on  the  supposition 
of  his  epistles  being  genuine,  as  we  have  very  good  ground 
to  believe  they  are,  our  Professor  thinks  it  necessary,  for 
the  sake  of  "  propriety,  as  well  as  consistency,"  to  ascribe 
to  this  truly  pious  and  venerable  prelate ;  of  whom  it  may 
indeed  be  said,  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Campbell,  that  he  has 
thus  "  suffered  a  second  martyrdom"  in  his  character,  for 
no  other  reason  but  because  he  is  considered  as  "  the  first 
ecclesiastical  author  who  mentions  bishop,  presbyter,  and 
deacon,  as  three  distinct  orders  of  church  officers."  And 
what  wonder  is  it,  if  he  were  really  so,  when  in  the  re- 
stricted sense  of  "  ecclesiastical  authors,"  as  excluding  the 
inspired  writings,  we  know  of  none  whose  writings  are 


1 74f  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

received  as  authentic,  pi*ior  to  Ignatius,  unless  Clemens  of 
Rome :  and  does  Ignatius  contradict  or  differ  misterially 
from  Clemens  ?  Or  does  Pol^xarp,  of  Smyrna,  whom  Dr. 
Campbell  has  quoted  with  so  much  triumph,  differ  so 
widely  from  Ignatius,  as  to  show  not  merely  a  "  diversity 
in  style,  but  a  repugnancy  in  sentiment  ?"  What  though 
both  these  old  bishops  of  Rome  and  of  Smyrna  speak  in 
very  honourable  terms,  not  only  of  presbyters,  but  of  dea- 
cons, and  seem  to  direct  the  attention  of  those  whom  they 
addressed  chiefly  to  these  two  orders  of  ministers  ?  Do 
any  such  hints  and  directions,  with  all  that  can  be  drawn 
from  them  in  the  way  of  doubtful  inference,  speak  so  de- 
cisively in  favour  of  Presbytery,  as  the  precise  words  of 
Ignatius,  without  any  comment,  do  in  support  of  Episco- 
pacy ?  Are  the  specious  arguments  of  philosophy  held 
forth  to  prove  the  formation  of  all  things  by  a  first  cause, 
so  clear  and  satisfying  a  demonstration  to  the  mind  of  a 
Christian,  as  this  single  and  express  assertion  of  the  inn 
spired  historian,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  hea- 
ven and  the  earth  ?" 

But  it  is  needless  to  insist  any  longer  on  this  part  of  eu¥ 
subject,  since  our  Lecturer  himself  thinks  proper  to  close 
it  in  these  words — "  But  should  we  admit  after  all,  in  op- 
position to  strong  presumptive  evidence,  the  entire  genu- 
ineness of  the  letters  in  question,  all  that  could  be  fairly 
inferred  from  the  concession  is,  that  the  distinction  of 
orders,  and  subordination  of  the  presbyters,  obtained  about 
twenty  or  thirty  years  earlier  than  I  have  supposed,  and 
that  it  was  a  received  distinction  at  Antioch,  and  in  Asia 
Minor,  before  it  was  known  in  Macedonia,  and  other  parts 
of  the  Christian  church.  That  its  prevalence  has  been 
gradual,  and  that  its  introduction  has  arisen  from  the 
example  and  influence  of  some  of  the  principal  cities,  is 
highly  probable."  It  is  thus  that  our  learned  Professor  is 
pleastd  to  make  concessions,  for  the  sake  of  drawing  such 
inferences  from  them,  as  may  best  suit  his  own  purpose^ 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  Vt% 

and  at  last  to  decide  the  very  point  in  question,  and  a  mat- 
ter of  the  utmost  importance,  by  no  other  argument,  than 
that  his  account  of  it  '^  is  highly  probable  ;"  an  argument, 
which,  whatever  may  be  allowed  to  it  in  speculative  debate, 
can  have  but  little  weight  in  determining  matters  of  fact. 
Yet  if  we  were  to  make  the  most  of  our  adversary's  con- 
cession, that  when  Ignatius  wrote,  the  "  distinction  of 
orders,  and  subordination  of  presbyters,  which  we  plead 
for,  was  received  at  Antioch,  and  in  Asia  Minor,"  and  to 
admit  his  "  probability,  that  the  example  of  some  of  the 
principal  cities"  would  have  considerable  influence  in  favour 
of  such  distinction,  we  should  not  be  ashamed  to  own,  that 
the  example  of  such  a  "  principal"  place,  as  the  scripture 
describes  Antioch  to  have  been,  has  great  weight  with  us  ; 
and  that  we  think  it  a  point  of  no  small  consequence  gained, 
to  find  our  scheme  of  church  government  so  early  received 
"  in  a  city,"  where  the  disciples  were  first  called  Chris- 
tians.^ 

-  But  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  not  only  show  what  was  the 
form  of  government  in  the  church  at  the  time  when  he 
>vrote  them,  (which  was  a  very  few  years  after  the  death 
of  the  apostle  St.  John)  and  what  it  was  in  the  city  of  An- 
tioch, of  which  he  had  been  bishop  near  forty  years  ;  they 
also  exhibit  the  clearest  evidence  of  his  belief,  that  the 
three  distinct  orders  of  bishops,  presbyters  and  deacons 
were  of  divine  institution,  and  essential  to  the  regular  con- 
stitution of  the  Christian  church.  In  these  epistles  he  men- 
tions several  of  his  contemporary  bishops  by  name,  Onesi- 
mus,  bishop  of  the  Ephesians;  Damas,  of  the  Magnesians ; 
Polybius,  of  theTrallians;  and  Polycarp,  of  the  Smymians; 
and  still  as  he  mentions  them,  he  highly  commends  the 
presbyters  and  deacons  for  their  obedience  to  them,  as  to 
the  command  of  God,  and  according  to  the  will  of  Jesus 
Christ.     Having  saluted  the  Trallians  in  the  fulness  of  his 

*  Acts  xi.  26. 


1  r6  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

apostolic  character,  he  earnestly  exhorts  them  to  be  subject 
to  their  bishop,  presbyters  and  deacons  ;  for  without  these, 
there  is  no  church  :  And  then,  entreating  them  to  beware 
of  the  poisonous  doctrine  of  certain  dangerous  heretics,  he 
adds—"  And  this  you  will  do,  while  you  are  not  puffed  up, 
nor  separated  from  God,  even  Jesus  Christ ;  nor  from  the 
bishop,  and  the  commands  of  the  apostles.  He  that  is 
within  the  altar  is  pure ;  but  he  that  does  any  thing"  (be- 
longing to  the  altar)  "  without  the  bishop,  presbyters  and 
deacons,  is  defiled  in  his  conscience."  So  likewise  in  th& 
inscription  of  his  epistle  to  the  Philadelphians,  he  "  salutes 
them  in  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  everlasting  and  per- 
manent joy,  especially  if  they  were  at  unity  with  the  bishop, 
and  the  presbyters  that  were  with  him,  and  the  deacons, 
who  were  appointed  according  to  the  mind  of  Jesus  Christ, 
whom  he  had,  according  to  his  ov/n  will,  established  wirix 
firmness  by  his  holy  spirit."  And  in  the  epistle  to  the 
church  at  Smyrna,  after  mentioning  the  reverence  which  is 
due  to  the  sacred  orders  of  the  ministry,  "  as  the  com- 
mandment of  God,"  he  adds—"  Let  no  man  do  any  thing 
of  what  belongs  to  the  church,  separately  from  the  bishop. 
Let  that  be  esteemed  a  valid  eucharist,  which  is  celebrated 
by  the  bishop,  or  by  one  whom  he  appoints.  Without  the 
bishop,  it  is  not  lawful  either  to  baptize,  or  to  celebrate  the 
feast  of  charity ;  but  that  which  he  approves,  is  also  pleas- 
ing unto  God,  that  so  whatever  is  done,  may  be  sure  and 
well  done." 

These  are  some  of  the  many  passages  which  might  be 
produced  from  the  epistles  of  Ignatius,  to  evince  his  belief 
of  a  truth,  v/hich  even  these  few  are  sufficient  to  show  he 
certainly  did  believe,  that  the  principal  care,  and  govern- 
ment of  the  church  of  Christ  had  been  committed  by  his 
apostles  to  those,  who,  immediately  after  the  apostolic  age, 
were  peculiarly  distinguished  by  the  title  of  bishops^  having 
under  them  the  two  inferior  orders  of  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons^ discharging  their  several  offices  always  in  conjunctioi>. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  1 77 

with,  and  subordination  to,  their  respective  bishops,  with- 
out whose  authority,  in  the  opinion  of  Ignatius,  no  bap- 
tism was  to  be  administered,  no  eucharist  celebrated  ;  no- 
thing, in  short,  to  be  done,  which  more  immediately  be- 
longed to  the  service  of  the  church,  or  was  included  in  the 
commission  which  our  Lord  gave  his  apostles,  to  be  con- 
tinued to  the  end  of  the  world,  for  making  the  nations 
Christian,  and  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  neces- 
sary to  salvation  and  happiness.  Such  was  the  doctrine 
delivered  by  this  holy  and  venerable  bishop  of  Antioch, 
who  could  not  but  be  perfecdy  acquainted  with  the  form  of 
government,  which  the  apostles,  by  their  Lord's  command, 
had  settled  in  the  church,  since  he  lived  so  near  to  their 
times,  and  had  not  only  been  instructed  by  them,  but,  as 
St.  Chrysostom  tells  us,  actually  received  his  ordination 
from  their  sacred  hands.  It  is  likewise  to  be  considered, 
that  these  epistles  were  written  by  him,  in  the  immediate 
prospect  of  that  violent  death,  to  which  he  was  condemned 
for  his  bold  and  steady  adherence  to  the  faith  of  Christ, 
and  when,  having  but  a  short  time  to  live,  he  was  desirous 
to  leave  behind  him  this  last  and  dying  testimony  of  his 
zeal  for  the  honour  of  his  blessed  Master,  and  the  advance- 
ment of.  that  glorious  cause,  for  which  he  was  about  to 
suffer.  All  these  are  considerations  which  must  add  great 
weight  to  the  evidence  of  Ignatius,  and  may  well  convince 
every  impartial  reader  of  his  epistles,  how  unreasonable  it 
is  to  expect  or  desire  any  stronger,  or  more  ample  testi- 
mony than  that  which  they  bear  to  the  Episcopal  govern- 
ment of  what  even  Dr.  Campbell  is  obliged  to  acknowledge 
to  be  the  "  truly  primitive  church." 

In  the  middle  of  his  remarks  on  Ignatius,  the  Doctor 
thought  proper  to  introduce,  without  much  appearance  of 
connection,  another  writer  of  the  second  age,  "  in  whose 
writings,"  he  says,  the  "  names  bishop  and  presbyter, 
and  others  of  the  like  import,  are  sometimes  used  indis- 
criminately."   This  writer  is  no  other  than  Ireneeus,  who 

23 


1 7&  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

was  first  a  presbyter,  and  afterwards  bishop  of  the  church 
of  Lyons,  and  having  successively  discharged  these  two 
offices,  can  hardly  be  supposed  lo  confound,  or  be  ignorant 
of,  the  distinction  between  them.  Indeed,  our  Lecturer 
acknowledges,  "  that  the  distinction  of  these,  as  of  differ- 
ent orders,  began  about  this  time  generally  to  prevail; 
although  the  difference  was  not  near  so  considerable  as  it 
became  afterwards.  Accordingly  Irenseus,"  he  says, "  talks 
in  much  the  same  style  of  both.  What  at  one  time  he  as- 
cribes to  bishops,  at  another  he  ascribes  to  presbyters  :  he 
speaks  of  each  in  the  same  terms,  as  entitled  to  obedience 
from  the  people,  as  succeeding  the  apostles  in  the  ministry 
of  the  word,  as  those  by  whom  the  apostolic  doctrine  and 
traditions  had  been  handed  down." — Now,  the  proof  of  all 
this  similarity  of  order,  and  sameness  of  office  in  bishop 
and  presbyters,  is  taken  from  one  single  passage  of  the 
work  of  Irenseus  against  the  heretics  of  his  time,  wherein, 
speaking  of  apostolic  tradition,  he  defines  it  to  be  that, 
*'  which,  from  the  apostles,  is  preserved  through  successions 
of  presbyters  in  the  churches."*  On  which  passage  Dr« 
Campbell  makes  this  observation — Here  not  only  "  are  the 
presbyters  mentioned  as  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  but 
in  ranging  the  ministries,  no  notice  is  taken  of  any  inter- 
vening order,  such  as  that  of  bishops."  And  for  that  very 
reason,  as  such  an  intei-vening  order  certainly  existed  in 
the  days  of  Irenseus,  we  may  justly  conclude,  that  the 
presbyters  were  not  mentioned  by  him,  "  as  the  successors 
of  the  apostles  ;"  nor  do  his  words  imply  any  such  thing ; 
being  solely  intended  to  point  out  a  continued  succession 
and  course  of  presbyters,  or,  as  we  would  now  say,  clergy 
in  general,  as  (custodes)  guardians  of  apostolic  tradition. 

•  The  words  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell  are  these :  "  Cum  autem  ad  earn 
iterum  traditionem  qu3e  est  ab  apostolis,  quae  per  successiones  presbytc- 
rorum  in  ecclesiis  custoditur,  provocamus  eos,  qui  adversantur  traditioni, 
dicent  se  non  solum  presbyter  is  sed  etiam  apostolis  existentes  sapien- 
tiores,  synceram  invenisse  veritatem."     Lib.  iii.  cap.  2. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  1 79 

It  is  well  known,  that  the  word  presbyter  may  refer  to 
age,  as  well  as  to  office;  and  though  the  writers  of  the 
second  century  never  apply  the  title  of  presbyter  to  a  bi- 
shop of  their  own  time,  but  always  appropriate  it  to  sub- 
ordinate presbyters,  to  express  the  distinction  between  bi- 
shops and  them ;  yet  when  they  speak  of  bishops  of  former 
times,  they  make  no  scruple  of  giving  them  sometimes  the 
appellation  of  presbyters,  as  being  a  term  equivalent  to  that 
of  ancients^  signifying  not  their  office,  but  their  antiquity 
in  the  church,  and  in  that  sense,  it  might  be  applied  not  to 
©ne  only,  but  to  all  the  orders  of  the  sacred  ministry. 
That  this  was  the  sense  in  which  Irenseus  applied  it,  in  the 
passage  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell,  is  sufficiently  evident 
from  other  parts  of  his  writings,  where  it  is  expressly 
mentioned,  that  in  the  chief  care  and  government  of  the 
church,  the  bishops  only  were  the  successors  of  the  apos- 
tles.  Thus,  when  arguing  against  the  heretics  who  infested 
the  church  in  his  time,  to  show  that  their  doctrine  was  not 
that  of  the  apostles,   nor  handed  down  from  them,  he 
makes  the  following  appeal — "  We  can  reckon  up  those 
who  were  by  the  apostles  ordained  bishops  in  the  churches, 
and  those  who  were  their  successors  even  to  our  own  time. 
They  never  taught  nor  knew  any  of  the  wild  opinions  of 
these  men  :    And  had  the  apostles  known  any  hidden  mys- 
teries, which  they  imparted  to  none  but  the  perfect  (as  the 
heretics  pretend),  they  would  have  committed  them  with 
particular  care  to  those  persons,  to  whom  they  committed 
the  churches  themselves.     For  they  would  be  extremely 
desirous,  that  those  should  be  perfect,  and  unreprovable  in 
all  things,  whom  they  left  to  be  their  successors,  and  to 
whom  they  consigned  their  own  authority." — He  then  adds 
— "  Because  it  would  be  tedious  to  enumerate  the  succes- 
sion of  bishops  in  all  the  churches,  he  would  instance  in 
that  of  Rome  ;   which  succession  he  brings  down  to  Eleu- 
therius,  who  was  the  twelfth  from  the  apostles,  and  was 


180  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

bishop  there,  when  Irenseus  MTOte  this  treatise  ;"*  in  ano- 
ther part  of  which  he  tells  us,  that  the  true  knowledge  Is 
"  the  doctrine  of  the  apostles,  and  the  ancient  state  of  the 
church  throughout  the  world,  and  the  character  of  the 
body  of  Christ,  according  to  the  successions  of  bishops, 
to  whom  they  committed  that  church,  which  is  in  every 
place,  and  has  descended  even  unto  us."t  In  these  pas- 
sages of  Irenaeus,  where  the  succession  from  the  apostles 
is  plainly  and  purposely  held  up  to  view,  we  see  ^'  no  no- 
tice taken  of  any  intervening  order,"  such  as  that  of  Dr. 
Campbell's  presbyters,  as  in  any  way  necessary  to  the  car- 
ryinj^  on  that  succession,  which,  together  with  their  doc- 
trine, was  delivered  by  the  apostles  to  the  several  churches 
founded  by  them,  and  is  therefore  very  properly  made  use 
of,  to  show  that  the  doctrine  was  most  likely  to  be  found 
where  the  succession  was  regular. 

.  The  same  argument,  we  have  seen,  was  employed  by 
another  ecclesiastical  writer  of  this  period,  the  much  ad- 
mired, yet  deeply  regretted  TertuUian,  who  speaks  of  it  as 
a  thing  universally  admitted  in  his  time,  that  the  apostles 

*  His  words  are,  "  Habemns  annumerare  eos,  qui  ab  apostolis  instituti 
sunt  Episcopi  in  ecclesiis,  et  successores  eorum  usque  ad  nos,  qui  nil  tale 
docuerint,  neque  cognoverunt,  quale  ab  his  deliratur.  Etenim  si  recon- 
dita  mysteria  scissent  apostoli,  quae  seorsim  ec  latenter  ab  reliquis  perfectos 
docebant,  his  vel  maxime  traderent  ea,  quibus  etiam  ipsas  ecclesias  com- 
mittebant.  Valde  enim  perfectos,  et  irreprehensibiles  in  omnibus  eos  vo- 
lebant  esse,  quos  et  successores  relinquebant,  suum  ipsorum  locum  magis- 
terii  tradentes. — Sed  quoniam  valde  longum  est  in  hoc  tali  volumine,  oni- 
r.ium  ecclesiarum  enumerare  successiones,  maxima  et  antiquissimse,  et  om- 
nibus cognitae,  a  gloriosissimis  duobus  apostolis  Petro  et  Paulo  Romse  fun- 
datae  et  constitutse  ecclesiae,  earn  quam  habet  ab  apostolis  traditionem,  et 
annunciatam  horoinibus  fidem  per  successiones  Episcoporum  pervenientem 
usque  ad  nos,  indicantes  confundimus  onines  cos,"  See.  Iren.  lib.  iii.  cap.  3. 
f  Agnitio  vera  est  apostolorum  doctrina,  et  antiquus  ecclesix  status  in 
\miverso  mundo,  et  character  corporis  Christi  secundum  successiones 
Episcoporum  quibus  illi  earn,  quae  in  unoquoque  loco  est,  ecclesiam  tra- 
f1:derunt,  quae  pervenit  usque  ad  nos,  S;c.     Lib.  iv.  cap.  6S. 


Gefieral  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  181 

placed  bishops  in  all  the  churches  which  they  planted ;  of 
which  he  gives  a  particular  instance  in  that  of  Smyrna  and 
of  Rome,  and  argues  against  the  heretics  in  the  same 
manner  as  Irenaeus  had  done  ;  proving,  as  has  been  already 
shown,  that  by  this  succession,  from  the  apostles,  of  regu- 
lar and  lawful  bishops,  the  true  faith  was  preserved  in  all 
the  churches,  which  had  their  foundation  in  some  one  or 
other  of  the  apostles,  and  thereby  retained  the  apostolic 
doctrine.  And  however  Tertullian  may  have  erred  in 
matters  of  opinion,  by  mistaking  the  meaning  of  some 
texts  of  scripture,  and  building  too  much  on  his  own  fan- 
ciful interpretation  of  them,  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the 
regard  which  is  due  to  his  testimony,  when  asserting  such 
a  well  known  fact  as  that  of  the  succession  of  bishops  from 
the  apostles  ;  a  thing  so  fully  attested  by  the  ecclesiastical 
registers  to  which  he  refers. 

Passing  over  what  our  Lecturer  says  of  two  short,  and, 
we  suspect,  spurious,  letters  from  Pius,  bishop  of  Rome,  to 
Justus,  bishop  of  Vienna,  as  not  worthy  of  notice,  we  t  ome 
to  consider  a  passage  quoted  by  him  from  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  who  wrote  at  the  close  of  the  second  century, 
and  which  l>e  thus  translates — "  Just  so  in  the  church,  the 
presbyters  are  entrusted  with  the  dignified  ministry,  the 
deacons  with  the  subordinate.  Both  kinds  of  service  the 
angels  perform  to  God  in  the  administration  of  this  lower 
world."*  Dr.  Campbell  then  adds — "  Here  the  distinction 
is  strongly  marked  between  presbyter  and  deacon  :  But  is 
it  not  plain  from  his  words,  that  Clement  considered  the 
distinction  between  bishop  and  presbyter,  as,  even  in  his 
days,  comparatively  not  worthy  of  his  notice  ?"'|'  We 
must,  however,  beg  leave  to  say,  that  this  inference  does 

*  The  words  in  Greek,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell,  are — O^oi^^-  ^s  koci 
KO^oc  rriv  iKK\ri(na,v,  luv  j-csv  ^BX%uflix.m  en  Tcpao-jSulEpoi  (Tuj^ecnv  EiJtova  rviv 
vxYifiliKviv  ot  ^iajcovo*,  ra^vloig  ocfj-i^cJlixq  hoe,KOH(X,(;  ocyyeXoi  t£  U7r£p»il«v]»i  rw 
©eoi,  KOilix,  TYiv  Twv  -crfpiystwy  oiKovo/xiav.      Strom,  1.  I. 

t  Lecture  vi. 


182  Qeneral  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

not  appear  so  plain  as  the  Doctor  thinks  ;  not  only  because 
Clement's  words  evidently  refer  to  the  allusion  he  had  been 
drawing  from  philosophy  and  physic,  as  administering  to 
soul  and  body,  the  twofold  distinction  in  man ;  but  chiefly 
because  in  another  passage  of  this  very  work,  he  illustrates 
what  he  had  said  of  the  services  of  angels,  by  observing, 
that  the  faithful  presbyter,  though  not  honoured  with  the 
frst  seat  on  earthy  shall  yet  sit  on  one  of  the  four  and  twenty 
thrones  mentioned  in  St.  John's  revelation ;  from  which 
he  takes  occasion  to  show,  that  the  gradual  promotion  of 
bishops^  presbyters^  and  deacons^  bears  resemblance  to  the 
orders  of  angels,^  and  so  gives  ground  for  comparing  the 
hierarchy  in  the  church  on  earth  to  that  which  takes  place 
in  heaven.  And  that  this  same  Clement  was  very  far  from 
*'  considering  the  distinction  between  bishop  and  presbyter, 
as  not  worthy  of  his  notice,"  is  still  farther  evinced  by 
what  he  says  in  another  of  his  works,  where,  having  pointed 
out  some  texts  of  scripture,  as  containing  a  summary  of 
the  duties  which  concern  all  Christians  in  general,  he  adds 
' — "  that  there  are  other  precepts  without  number,  which 
concern  men  in  particular  capacities ;  some  which  relate  to 
presbyters,  others  which  belong  to  bishops,  and  others 
respecting  deacons  :"'|' — from  which  it  must  plainly  appear, 
not  only  that  Clement  regarded  the  distinction  between 
bishop,  presbyter,  and  deacon,  as  a  matter  that  ought  to 
be  duly  attended  to,  but  also  that  he  considered  the  re- 
spective duties  of  these  several  orders,  as  distinctly  stated 
in  the  holy  scriptures. 

■^  Ette*  xat  ai  ev1au9«  KoCioi.  tyiV  £x.)iX»3<3"iav  OTpoHOTr^i,  tTC^TKorr-jovy  wpeo'^y- 

'ivyXv/iHCTi'i,     Strom.  1,  VI. 

TOLiq  /5;CAoi$  rat?  aytatg  at  /xev  wpEcrCylEpotjjai  ds  ETtcrxoTTOi?,  at  oi  oiocKOVOi^* 
Poedag.  lib.  iii.  c.  12,  as  quoted  by  archbishop  Potter — On  Church  Govern- 
ment'—]).  165,  which  may  be  very  usefully  consulted  by  those  who  wish 
to  be  properly  informed  en  this  subject. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  183 

We  have  now  brought  down  the  evidence  in  support  of 
apostolic  Episcopacy,  as  the  government  of  the  primitive 
church,  to  that  period  which  our  learned  Professor  has 
thought  proper  to  fix  for  ascertaining  what  he  calls  the 
first  step  of  the  hierarchy.  We  must,  however,  consider 
it  as  the  second  step  of  his  course,  whereby  he  aflvances 
from  presbytery  to  what  he  calls  parochial  Episcopacy, 
and  which  he  pretends  to  found  on  the  unanimous  consent 
of  antiquity,  "  in  assigning  to  one  bishop  no  more  than  one 
ExxA*)?i«  or  congregation,  and  one  Ila^oixia  or  parish."  We 
have  already  taken  notice  of  his  opinion  respecting  the  first 
of  these  words,  which,  though  usually  translated  churchy 
"  when  it  is  not  applied  to  the  whole  Christian  community, 
can  only,"  he  says,  "  denote  a  single  congregation  of 
Christians ;  the  plural  number,  churches^  being  invariably 
used,  when  more  congregations  than  one  are  spoken  of, 
unless  the  subject  be  of  the  whole  commomvealth  of 
Christ."^  Hence  he  fondly  draws,  what  he  thinks  an 
unavoidable  conclusion,  that "  as  one  bishop  is  invariably 
considered,  in  the  most  ancient  usage,  as  having  only  one 
church  or  congregation,  it  is  manifest  that  his  inspection  at 
first  was  only  over  one  parish."'!' 

Laying  this  do\vn  as  the  fundamental  position,  on  which 
rises  under  his  masterly  hands  that  specious  fabric  which  he 
has  dignified  with  the  name  of  "  parochial  Episcopacy," 
he  seems  to  feel  himself  standing  on  sure  ground;  and  his 
pupils  no  doubt  would  be  encouraged  to  view  it  as  such, 
having  had  no  intimation  given  them  that  it  was  the  very 
same  ground  from  which  so  many  of  his  predecessors  had 
been  successively  beaten,  and  which  was  assumed,  with 
the  same  confidence,  about  a  century  ago,  by  the  author  of 
a  work  already  referred  to,  called  an  "  Enquiry  into  the 
constitution^  discipline^  unity  and  worship  of  the  Primitive 
Churchy    Of  the  striking  similarity  between  this  work, 

*  Lecture  vi.  t  Lecture  vi. 


1 84  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy » 

and  that  part  of  Dr.  CampbelFs  Lectures  which  is  now 
before  us,  I  cannot  express  my  opinion  more  justly,  or  to 
better  purpose,  than  in  the  words  of  a  learned  divine  of  the 
church  of  England,  who,  in  some  remarks  lately  published 
on  this  subject,  says — "  Having  attended  to  the  progress 
of  this  controversy,  and  particularly  marked  the  ground  on 
which,  from  time  to  time,  it  has  been  placed,  I  have  no 
difficulty  in  tracing  the  road  which  the  Professor  has  tra- 
velled; and  there  is  little  doubt  on  my  mind,  that  the  pub- 
lication last  mentioned  was  the  one  which  the  Professor 
had  before  him  when  he  put  together  that  part  of  his  Lec- 
tures which  is  now  more  immediately  under  consideration ; 
because  the  same  arrangement  of  argument  and  proof,  the 
same  mutilation  of  extract,  the  same  want  of  appeal  to  that 
evidence  which  the  scriptures  are  competent  to  furnish, 
together  with  the  same  turn  of  expression,  are  to  be  met 
with  in  the  publications  of  both  writers;  a  circumstance 
not  to  be  accounted  for  but  on  the  supposition  of  one  hav- 
ing copied  from  the  other."^ 

Now,  the  foundation,  which  the  Enquirer  first,  and  our 
Lecturer  after  him,  have  both  considered  as  firmly  laid  in  the 
constitution  of  the  primitive  church,  is  plainly  this,  that  the 
charge  of  one  bishop  was  originally  confined  to  one  congre- 
gation, or  parish,  which  they  both  define,  almost  in  the  same 
terms,  to  be  "  a  competent  number  of  Christians  dwelling 
near  together,  having  one  bishop,  pastor  or  minister  set 
over  them,  with  whom  they  all  met  at  one  time  to  worship 
and  serve  God."  This  Dr.  Campbell  further  explains,  by 
"  observing  once  and  again,  that  ever}^  church  had  its  own 
pastors,  and  its  own  presbyter}^  independendy  of  every 
other  church :  And  when  one  of  the  presbyters  came  to  be 
considered  as  the  pastor  ^  byway  of  eminence,  the  rest  were 
regarded  only  as  his  assistants,  vicars  or  curates,  who  acted 

*  See  Mr.  Daubeny's  Preliminary  Discourse  to  those  lately  publishetl 
on  the  Great  J)octrine  nf  Atonement,  p.  90. 


Generdl  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  Ig5 

under  his  direction  ;"  just  as  the  Enquirer  had  before  illus- 
trated his  definition  of  a  presbyter,  by  observing,  '*  that  as 
a  curate  hath  the  same  mission  and  power  with  the  minis- 
ter whose  place  he  supplies,  yet  not  being  the  minister  of 
that  place,  he  cannot  perform  there  any  acts  of  his  minis- 
terial function,  without  leave  from  the  minister  thereof ;  so 
a  presb\ter  had  the  same  order  and  power  with  a  bishop, 
whom  he  assisted  in  his  cure,  yet  being  not  the  bishop  or 
minister  of  that  cure,  he  could  not  there  perform  any  parts 
of  his  pastoral  office  without  the  permission  of  the  bishop 
thereof;  so  that  what  we  generally  render  bishops,  priests 
and  deacons,  would  be  more  intelligible  in  our  tongue,  if 
we  did  express  it  by  rectors,  vicars  and  deacons;  by  rec- 
fors  understanding  the  bishops,  and  by  vicars  the  presby- 
ters; the  former  being  the  actual  incumbents  of  a  place, 
and  the  latter  curates  or  assistants,  and  so  different  in  de- 
gree, but  yet  equal  in  order." 

Thus  it  is,  that  these  tvvo  authors  go  hand  in  hand  in 
their  definition  and  explanation  of  the  point  in  question, 
the  latter  boiTowing  from  the  former,  and  both  founding 
their  application  of  the  term  parish^  on  the  et^molog}^  of 
the  original  word,  to  which  they  tell  us,  "  that  there  is 
commonly  a  strict  regard  paid,  in  the  first  application  of  a 
name  to  any  particular  purpose."  We  know  wtry  well  that 
in  the  primitive  times,  to  which  we  are  now  looking  back, 
a  bishop's  charge  was  called  his  ila^otxia  or  parish  ;  and 
we  are  told  in  some  Lexicons,  that  the  verb  iTa^oiKEo;,  from 
which  the  English  word  parish  is  derived,  signifies  "  habi- 
tare  juxta,"  to  dwell  or  inhabit  near.  Yet  some  of  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament  use  the  word  in  a  different 
sense,  of  which  several  instances  could  be  produced ;  and  a 
very  "  learned  and  accurate"  Lexicographer  shows  from 
these  instances,  that  the  word  refers  to  "  a  sojourning,  or 
temporary  dwelling  in  a  strange  or  foreign  country,"  and 
was  therefore  very  descriptive  of  the  character  and  situation 
of  those  heavenly-minded  Christians,  who,  as  strangers 

24 


1S6  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

and  pilgrims,  passed  the  time  of  their  sojourning  here  in 
fear,  looking  forward  in  hope  to  a  more  settled  habita- 
tion.* 

Our  Lecturer  indeed  sa)  s — ^"  It  must  not  be  imagined, 
that  he  lays  too  great  stress  on  the  import  of  words,  whose 
significations  in  time  come  insensibly  to  alter:"  And  yet, 
without  taking  any  notice  of  the  alteration,  which  time  has 
introduced  into  the  use  of  the  original  word  in  question, 
he  immediately  after  asserts,  "  that  the  word  iTa^oiKia,  in 
lu^tm  parochia^  can  be  applied  no  otherwise,  when  it  re- 
lates to  place,  than  the  term  parish  is  with  us  at  this  day ;" 
whereas  the  fact  is,  as  clearly  exhibited  by  a  learned  and 
inquisitive  searcher  into  these  matters,t  that  though  this 
term  was  applied  in  the  primitive  times  to  signifv  an  Epis- 
copal diocese,  yet  it  was  so  far  from  being  confined  to  a 
single  congregation,  or  to  one  place  of  worship,  and  the 
inhabitants  near  it,  that  it  comprehended  all  that  were  in- 
cluded in  the  civil  government  of  every  city,  and  the  re- 
gion round  about  it,  and,  therefore,  was  of  greater  or 
smaller  extent,  according  as  the  government  of  such  city 
happened  to  have  a  larger  or  lesser  jurisdiction. 

In  opposition,  however,  to  this  well  established  fact,  our 
Professor  still  insists  on  his  being  able  to  evince,  beyond 
all  possible  doubt,  as  he  affii-ms  in  the  beginning  of  his 
seventh  Lecture,  that  "  the  bishop's  cure  was  originally 
confined  to  a  single  church  or  congregation  ;  which  he  in- 

*  See  in  Mr.  Parkhurst's  Greek  and  English  Lexicon  to  the  JVeiu  Tes- 
lament,  the  words — TTa^ot^csw,  occurring  Luke  xxiv.  18  Heb.  xi.  9.— 
ria^oixio.,  occurring  Acts  xiii.  17.  Applied  spiritually,  1  Peter  i.  17.— 
ITa^oiv.oc,  occurring  Acts  vii.  6 — 29.  Applied  spiritually,  Eph.  ii.  19,  1 
Pet.  ii  11.  In  conformity  with  the  meaning  annexed  to  it  by  the  in- 
spired writers,  Suicer  renders  the  word  Ila^'Oixsw  by  the  Latin — Advena 
or  Peregrinus  sum,  and  cites  as  authority  for  so  doing,  Philo  Judseus, 
Basil  and  Theodoret. — See  an  Original  Draught  of  the  Primitive  Church, 
ejTc.  p.  34.  35. 

f  See  VIr.  Bingham's  Origines  Ecclesiastics,  or  the  Antiquities  of  the 
Christian  Church,  vol.  iii.  p.  344,  &c. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  1 87 

tends  to  show  from  the  particulars  recorded  in  ancient 
authors,  in  relation  both  to  him  and  to  it,  and  which,"  he 
says,  "  can  be  verified  from  the  clearest  and  most  explicit 
declarations  of  these  primitive  writers,  particularly  of  Ig- 
natius, of  Justin  Martyr,  of  Irenseus,  of  TertuUian,  of  Cy- 
prian, and  several  others."  It  is  somewhat  strange,  that 
he  should  have  omitted  an  author  more  ancient  than  any 
of  these,  the  writer  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  who  gives 
us  a  particular  account  of  the  very  first  church  formed  by 
them,  the  church  of  Jerusalem,  and  formed,  no  doubt,  as 
a  pattern  to  all  succeeding  churches.  Of  this  church,  it 
is  universally  agreed,  as  Dr.  Campbell  himself  acknow- 
ledges, that  the  first  bishop  was  James,  sumamed  the 
yust^  a  brother  or  near  kinsman  of  our  Lord ;  and  whether 
he  was  of  the  number  of  the  twelve  or  not,  is  of  no  conse- 
quence, since  he  is  expressly  called  an  apostle,  was  evi- 
dently vested  with  the  authority  of  an  apostolic  bishop, 
and  in  that  character  placed  at  the  head  of  the  church  in 
Jerusalem.  The  marks  of  distinction,  by  which  he  is 
plainly  pointed  out  in  that  station,  are  too  conspicuous  not 
to  strike  every  attentive  reader.  When  St.  Peter  had  de- 
clared the  manner  of  his  miraculous  deliverance  from 
prison,  to  such  of  the  disciples  as  he  found  gathered  to- 
gether, he  desired  them  to  "  go  and  show  these  things  to 
James,  and  to  the  brethren:"^  but  why  to  James  in  particu- 
lar, if  he  was  not  the  principal  person  to  be  informed  of  that 
event,  and  who  would  most  probably  have  the  brethren, 
that  is,  the  elders  or  presbyters  with  him,  as  we  find  they 
were  on  another  occasion,  when  St.  Paul  having  returned 
to  Jerusalem,  from  preaching  the  gospel  among  the  Gen- 
tiles, was  desirous  to  give  an  account  of  his  success,  and 
for  that  purpose  "  went  in,  the  day  following,  unto  James, 
and  all  the  elders,  or  presbyters,  were  present  ?"t  In  his 
epistle  to  the  Galatians,  the  same  St.  Paul  not  only  places 

*  Acts  xii.  17.  t  Acts  xxi.  18. 


i^B  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

James  before  Cephas  and  John,  but  speaks  of  those  who 
came  down  from  Judea  to  Antioch,  as  "  coming  frora 
James,"^  and  not  from  the  other  apostles  and  elders,  of 
whom  there  appears  to  have  been  a  considerable  number 
then  residing  at  Jerusalem:  And  if  we  turn  to  the  fifteenth 
chapter  of  the  Acts,  where  the  cause  of  those  persons 
coming  down  from  Judea  to  Antioch  is  particularly  nar- 
rated, we  find,  that  in  the  council  of  the  aposdes  and  el- 
ders, who  "  came  together  to  consider  of  the  matter"  in 
question,  after  Peter,  Barnabas  and  Paul  had  severally 
delivered  their  opinions  on  the  subject  before  them,  James 
spoke  last,  introducing  his  discourse  with  this  address-??^ 
**  Men  and  brethren,  hearken  unto  me,"  and  closing  it 
with  a  decisive  sentence,  which,  delivered  by  hin>  as  pre- 
siding in  the  council,  put  an  end  to  the  controversy.-}* 

All  these  circumstances  put  together,  afford  the  most 
satisfactory  evidence,  that  the  person  thus  distinguished  by 
title  pa^  which  he  acted,  and  the  respect  which  was  paid  to 
his  authority,  was  really,  what  he  has  been  constantly  re- 
presented by  the  concurring  testimony  of  all  antiquity,  the 
fixed  bjshop  of  the  whole  church  of  Jerusalem,  having  a 
number  of  presbyters  and  deacons  under  him,  and  a  great 
body  of  Christians  belonging  to  his  Episcopal  charge.  No, 
says  Dr.  Campbell,  he  was  nothing  more  than  "  the  pastor 
of  '^.  single  parish,  whose  whole  flock  assembled  in  the  same 
placv;,  for  the  purposes  of  public  worship,  and  that  they  might 
^11  join  in  one  prayer  aijd  one  supplication  ;"  the  nqieaning  of 
which  is  plainly  this,  that  let  the  sacred  writers,  and  the 
fathers  of  the  church  after  them,  say  what  they  will  of  the 
numerous  conversions  wrought  by  the  blessed  j^postl^s 
themselsves,  or  by  their  inspired  fellow-labourers,  and 
successors  in  the  ministry  of  the  gospel,  yet  the  utmost 
result  of  all  their  labours,  during  the  first  three  hundred 
years  after  Christ,  could  never  amount  to  more,  even  in 

»  Gal.  ii.  12.  t  Acts  XV.  13—19. 


general  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  %  89 

tile  largest  cities  upon  earth,  including  their  adjacent  terri- 
tories, than  just  such  a  competent  number  of  beUevers  as 
could  be  contained  within  the  walls  of  a  single  oratory^,  or 
place  of  worship,  where  they  might  assemble  with  their 
bishop  and  presbyters,  that  is,  according  to  our  professor, 
with  the  parsOi>  and  his  elders,  "to  hear  the  scriptures 
read,  and  receive  spiritual  exhortations."* 

Of  this  his  favourite  scheme  of  "  parochial  Episcopacy,'' 
it  flight  have  been  expected,  that  our  learned  Lecturer 
would  have  began  his  proof  from  the  place  where  the  church 
itself  began,  and  so  have  taken  the  Jerusalem-parish,  which 
has  long  been  esteemed  the  mother^  as  the  model  likewise 
of  all  the  other  cjburches  in  these  eatly  and  perilous  times, 
>yhen,  as  an  ancient  writer  tells  us,  this  ver}^  parish  or 
church  "  was  so  y;astly  enlarged  by  the  accession  of  mul- 
titudes qf  believers,  yea,  even  of  the  rulers  or  principal 
men  of  the  city^  that  it  produced  an  uproar  of  the  Jews, 
of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  they  being  afraid  that  the 
whole  city  would  own  Jesus  for  the  Christ."t  Let  us  try, 
then,  if  we  cap  discover,  even  from  scripture  itself,  how 
far  this  was  the  case,  since  our  Professor  has  given  us  no 
information  concerning  it,  supposing,  no  doubt,  that  his 
pupils  would  read,  and  judge  for  themselves. 

Nothing  can  be  more  clearly  expressed  than  the  account, 
which  the  sacred  historian  gives  us,  of  the  progressive 
enlargement  of  the  parish  or  diocese  of  Jerusalem,  both 
before  and  after  St.  James  was  appointed  its  bishop  by  the 
Other  aposdes.  In  the  frst  chapter  of  the  Acts,  we  are 
told,  that  the  number  of  the  disciples  assembled,  when 
Matthias  was  added  to  the  eleven  apostles,  was  about  an 
hundred  and  twenty  ;  but  these  could  be  only  a  part  of 
the  church,  as  we  are  assured,  that  our  Lord  appeared, 
after  his  resurrection,  to  "  above  fve  hundred  brethren  at 

*  Lecture  vii. 

f  Hegesippus  in  Euseb.  lib.  ii.  cap.  23. 


190  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

once,  the  greater  part  of  whom  remained"*  when  St.  Paul 
wrote  his  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  In  the  second 
chapter  of  the  Acts,  we  read  that  there  were  added  unto 
them  about  three  thousand  souls,  and  that  "  the  Lord  was 
dally  adding  to  the  church  such  as  should  be  saved."  If  it 
shall  be  objected,  that  of  these  three  thousand,  who  were 
converted  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  there  might  be  a  consi- 
derable number,  who  had  come  up  from  other  countries 
to  celebrate  that  holy  feast  at  Jerusalem,  it  should  be 
remembered,  that  they  are  said  to  have  "  continued  in  the 
apostles'  fellowship,  and  breaking  of  bread,  and  prayers  ;" 
which,  as  the  church  was  then  situated,  implies  that  they 
continued  with  them  in  Jerusalem,  and  so  became  inhabit- 
ants of  that  city,  if  they  were  not  so  before.^  But  should 
any  deduction  be  made  from  their  number,  nothing  of  that 
kind  can  be  pretended  in  the  next  instance  ;  for  in  the 
fourth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  we  are  told,  that  on  the  preaching 
of  Peter  and  John,  "  many  of  them  which  heard  the  word, 
believed,  and  the  number  of  the  men  was  about  fve  thou- 
sand,''''— Again,  we  read  in  the  ffth  chapter,  that  "  believers 
were  the  more  added  to  the  Lord,  multitudes  both  of  men 
and  women  ;"  and  in  the  sixth^  that  "  the  word  of  God  still 
increased,  and  the  number  of  the  disciples  multiplied  in 
Jerusalem  greatly,  and  a  great  company  of  the  priests  were 
obedient  to  the  faith."  In  addition  to  all  these  successive 
accounts  of  the  vast  increase  of  believers,  we  are  informed 
in  the  tzventy-first  chapter  of  the  Acts,  that  when  Paul  came 
up  to  Jerusalem,  and  went  in  to  James  and  his  presbyters, 
"  they  said  unto  him.  Thou  seest,  brother,  how  77ia7iy  thou- 
sandsX  there  are  of  Jews  which  believe."     And  when  we 

*  1  Cor.  XV.  6. 

t  See  this  matter  clearly  stated,  and  a  full  and  distinct  account  of  the 
yising  church  ai  Jerusalem,  in  a  most  elaborate  Defence  of  Diocesaii  Epis- 
iopacy,  by  Henry  Maurice,  D    D 

\  1  he  original  word  isMv^ty.^Efj  myriads,  which  is  generally  rendered 
■t.cn  thousands. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  191 

consider,  that  the  inspired  historian  who  relates  all  this  had 
but  little  reason  to  exaggerate,  or  boast  of,  the  prodigious 
increase  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  which  at  that  time  could 
only  serve  to  increase  the  rage  and  violence  of  their  ene- 
mies ;  as  we  cannot  withhold  our  belief  of  such  a  well-at- 
tested fact,  we  must  be  equally  at  a  loss  how  to  reconcile  to 
reason  and  common  sense,  the  contracting  such  numbers 
into  a  single  congregation,  or  pretending  that  so  many  thou- 
sands could  possibly  assemble  in  one  place,  for  the  exercise 
of  religious  worship,  at  a  time  when  their  peculiar  form  of 
worship  was  severely  prohibited,  and  could  not  be  cele- 
brated or  attended,  but  in  the  most  private  and  retired 
manner. 

Dr.  Campbell  acknowledges,  what  indeed  is  well  known, 
that  "  there  were  yet  no  magnificent  edifices  built  for  the 
reception  of  Christian  assemblies,  such  as  were  afterwards 
reared  at  a  great  expense,  and  called  churches.  Their 
best  accommodation,  for  more  than  a  century,"  he  says, 
"  was  the  private  houses  of  the  wealthiest  disciples,  which 
were  but  ill  adapted  to  receive  very  numerous  congrega- 
tions."— How  then,  we  may  ask,  could  such  a  "  numerous 
congregation,"  as  that  which  was  composed  of  the  "  many 
thousands'''  of  converted  Jews,  whom  St.  Luke  speaks  of, 
be  received,  for  "  the  purpose  of  public  worship,"  into  any 
private  house,  even  of  the  wealthiest  disciple  in  Jerusalem  ? 
Our  Lecturer  very  justly  observes,  that  "  it  is  not  so  much 
by  the  measure  of  the  ground,  as  by  the  number  of  the 
people,  that  the  extent  of  a  pastoral  charge  is  to  be  rec- 
koned ;"  and  he  supposes,  "  at  the  time  the  churches  were 
first  planted  by  the  apostles,  that  the  Christians  at  a  me- 
dium, were  one  thirtieth  part  of  the  people." — This  calcu- 
lation he  carries  into  the  country  called  Asia  Minor,  and 
"  supposes  further,  that  country  to  have  been  equal  then  in 
point  of  populousness  to  what  Great-Britain  is  at  present ; 
so  that  one  of  their  bishoprics,"  which  we  know,  were  then 
only  seven  in  number,  "  in  order  to  afford  a  congregation 


1 92  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

equal  to  that  of  a  middling  parish,  ought  to  have  been  eqiT^ 
jn  extent  to  thirty  parishes  in  this  island  :"*   And  on  that 
supposition,  how  is  it  possible  that  the  Christian  inhabit- 
ants of  such  an  extensive  tract  of  country,  and  so  numer- 
ous as  they  are  here  calculated  to  be,f  could  be  considered 
as  but  a  single  congregation,  or  *'  assemble  every  Lord's 
day,  for  the  purposes  of  public  worship,  in  the  saine place?"" 
For  so  Dr.  Campbell  translates  the  Greek  words  sr*  to  aoTo, 
which,  it  seems,  he  had  found  in  the  "  writings  of  those 
fathers,"  whose  names  he  had  just  before  mentioned.        '^ 
We  acknowledge,  that  there  is  such  an  expression  to  be 
met  with  in  Justin  Martyr's  apology  to  the  heathen  Em- 
peror for  the  persecuted  Christians ;  and  though  our  learned 
Professor  tells  us,   that  "  it  is  for  bfeviti/s  sake  he  does 
not  produce  the  passage  at  length,"^  we  are  yet  led  to  sus- 
pect, that  this  has  happened  for  the  sake  of  something  else, 
and  because  the  whole  passage,  short  as  it  is,  and  standing 
in  no  need  of  abbreviation,  contained  more  than  he  was 
willing  to  produce,  or  found  convenient  for  his  purpose* 
The  apologist,  in  offering  a  vindication  of  the  persecuted 
Christians  throughout  the  Roman  Empire,  takes  notice  of 
the   general  method,   which  they  adopted  in  performing 
their  religious  ser\^ice,  and  for  that  purpose  mentions — that 
*'  they  all  throughout  cities  and  countries^  aissemble  in  the 
same  place^  as  Dr.  Campbell  renders  et*  to  oLuioJ"^     But  this 
surely  could  not  mean,  that  the  whole  body  of  Christians 

*  Lecture  vii. 

t  This  calculation  is  well  illustrated  by  the  Anti-Jacobin  Me<oi&wer  of 
Dr.  Campbell's  work,  who  estimates  the  present  population  of  Britain 
at  only  7,000,000,  the  thirtieth  part  of  which  is  about  233,333,  and  that, 
divided  by  seven,  the  number  of  angels,  or  bishops  then  in  Asia  Minor;, 
leaves  about  33,333  members  for  each  congregation — a  number  by  far  too 
great  for  assembling  under  one  roof,  to  "  hear  the  scriptures  read,  and 
receive  spiritual  exhortation." 

:j:  Lecture  vii. 

J I  Justin  Martyr's  words  are,  Tlv.vim  y,oC[%  TroXs;^  w  cy^aq  fj-evovluiv  s'rr, 
TO  avio  cvvz'Avj(7i'  yiv^cA, 


Gmerai  Defence  of  Episcopaty»  193 

throughout  the  wide  extended  empire  of  Rome,  assembled 
together  in  one  place^  and  made  but  one  congregation ;  and, 
therefore,  to  prevent  the  appearance  of  such  a  glaring  ab- 
surdity, the  first  part  of  the  sentence,  mentioning  "  all 
throughout  cities  and  countries^''  is  prudently  omitted,  "for 
the  sake  of  brevity"  no  doubt,  both  by  our  Lecturer  and  by 
the  author,  from  whom  he  has  almost  literally  copied  the 
reasoning  which  he  makes  use  of,  on  this  part  of  his  sub- 
ject.* But  he  should  also  have  reflected,  that  the  pro- 
priety of  the  translation  on  which  this  reasoning  is  founded, 
has  in  general  no  great  authority  to  support  it,  and  in  some 
cases  cannot  possibly  be  admitted.  There  was  no  difficulty, 
however,  in  admitting  it,  in  the  beginning  of  the  second 
chapter  of  the  Acts,  where  the  twelve  apostles  are  said  to 
have  been  "  all  with  one  accord  in  one  place:'*''  But  towards 
the  conclusion  of  that  chapter,  after  "  the  three  thousand 
souls  were  added  to  them,"  where,  it  is  said — "  all  that 
believe  were  srt  to  ai/V — our  translators  have  rendered  it-— 
"  they  were  all  together^''  that  is,  consorted,  or  companied 
with  one  another,  but  not  so  as  to  be  all  crowded  into  one 
place  ;  which,  had  it  been  possible,  would  at  that  time  have 
been  very  imprudent.  Beza's  opinion  of  this  passage  is, 
that — "  the  common  assemblies  of  the  church,  with  their 
mutual  agreement  in  the  same  doctrine,  and  the  great  una- 
nimity of  their  hearts,  were  signified  by  it." — The  same 
may  be  said  of  that  passage  in  the  beginning  of  the  third 
chapter  of  the  Acts,  where  it  is  mentioned — that  "  Peter 
and  John  went  up  together^  ett*  to  a.\jV — that  is — for  the 
same  purpose,  into  "  the  temple,  at  the  hour  of  ,'rayer." 
And  in  the  fourth  chapter,  where  it  is  said — "  that  the 
kings  of  the  earth  stood  up,  and  the  rulers  were  gathered 

*  In  proof  of  this,  see  the  whole  second  chapter  of  the  Enquiry  into  the 
Constitution,  ijfc.  of  the  Primiti've  Church,  in  the  last  section  of  which 
chapter  the  author  indeed  quotes  the  words  of  Justin  Martyr,  which  he 
had  before  omitted,  and  translates  them  thus — "  On  Sunday  all  the  in- 
habitants, both  of  city  and  country,  met  together,"  &c. 

25 


is*  General  Defence  of  Ephcopacij, 

together^  bt*  to  aulo,  against  the  Lord,  and  against  his  Christ," 
it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  they  all  actualh^  assem-* 
bled  in  one  place^  when  the  passage  only  means,  that  they 
conspired  together  for  the  same  purpose,  the  words  plainly 
pointing  to  the  object^  and  not  to  the  place^  of  their  combi- 
nation ;  just  as  that  passage  of  Ignatius,  part  of  which  is 
quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell,  refers  not  to  the  place^  but  to  the 
object  or  purpose  for  which  the  Magnesians  were  to  assem- 
ble together.  "  Do  nothing,  therefore,"  says  Ignatius, 
*'  without  the  bishop  and  presbyters,  neither  strive  to  make 
any  thing  appear  a  reasonable  service,  which  is  done  in 
your  own  separate  or  private  way;  but  in  coming  together, 
let  there  be  one  prayer,  one  supplication,  one  mind,  one 
hope  ;"* — all  tending  to  show,  that  nothing  was  to.  be  done 
in  the  way  of  public  prayer  and  supplication,  but  as  ap- 
pointed and  performed  by  their  bishop  and  presbyters,  and 
so  as  to  manifest  a  becoming  love  of  unity  and  order.  That 
such  is  the  meaning  of  this  passage  of  Ignatius,  is  evident 
from  what  immediately  follows  on  the  same  subject,  in 
which  he  still  recommends  the  same  unity  of  mind  and 
spirit,  in  the  public  offices  of  religion ;  "  wherefore  come 
ye  all  together  as  unto  one  temple  of  God,  as  to  one  altar, 
as  to  one  Jesus  Christ."  For  as  he  told  the  Christians  at 
Smyrna,  when  exhorting  them  to  "  flee  all  divisions,  as  the 
beginning  of  evils — that  eucharist  is  to  be  looked  upon  as 
valid,"  or  well  established,  "  which  is  either  offered  by  the 
bishop,  or  by  him  to  "whom  the  bishop  has  given  his  con- 
sent,^'-\ 

But  to  "  evince,"  as  our  Lecturer  says,  "  beyond  all 
possible  doubt,  that  the  bishop's  cure  was  originally  con- 

*  The  words  of  Ignatius  are — Mnos  ^/^ft;  (Jiy^y  Ty  iirnxoira  k&a  ruv 

aXk  iTi  TO  kvlo^  jjiix  'rr^o^ivx'^:  /^-**  dc»5crii,  nq  vac^  /xia  eATTiifc     Fpist.   ac-. 
Magnes.  p.  33. 

t  See  A rchbi'ohop  Wake's  Translation. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  >95 

lined  to  a  single  church  or  congregation,"  he  still  appeals 
to  the  language  of  Ignatius,  and  insists,  that  as  there  was 
but  "  one  place  of  meeting,  so  there  was  but  one  commu- 
nion table  or  altar,  as  they  sometimes  metaphorically  called 
it.  There  is  but  one  altar,  said  Ignatius,*  as  there  is  but 
one  bishop."  This  saying,  we  know,  has  been  justly  re- 
ceived, and  understood  in  its  full  force,  by  every  candid 
Enquirer'^  into  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  and  our  Professor 
might  have  spared  the  unhandsome  reflection  cast  on  those 
who  differ  from  him  in  opinion,  with  respect  to  the  mean- 
ing of  it,  where  he  savs — "  Nothing  can  be  more  con- 
temptible than  the  quibbles  which  some  keen  controvertists 
have  employed  to  elude  the  force  of  this  expression.  They 
will  have  it  to  import  one  sort  of  unity  in  the  first  clause, 
tmd  quite  a  different  sort  in  the  second,  though  the  second 
is  introduced  merely  in  an  explanation  of  the  first.  In  the 
first,  say  they,  it  denotes,  not  a  numerical,  but  a  mystical 
unit}^,  not  one  thing,  but  one  kind  of  thing ;  in  the  second, 
one  identical  thing. "J 

In  this  manner  does  our  learned  Lecturer  run  on,  ex- 
posing, as  he  thinks,  the  "  chicane''^  of  those  who  pretend 
to  discover  any  distinction  in  the  unity  referred  to  in  the 
words  of  Ignatius.  Yet  he  might  have  remembered,  that 
there  are  words  recorded  by  an  inspired  writer,  describing 
a  "  sort"  of  unity  which  surely  requires  some  distinction 
in  the  application.  *'  That  they  all  may  be  one,"  says  our 
Lord,  "  as  thou  Father  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they 
also  may  be  one  in  us— that  they  may  be  one,  even  as  we 
are  one."||  Here  we  are  obliged  to  consider  the  unit)''  re- 
ferred to,  as  of  a  twofold  nature  ;  a  "  mystical  unity"  de- 
scribed in  the  words — "  that  they  may  be  one,"  and  an 


^  'Ev  Si/ctar/?^iov  i',-  V  ETTto-Koro-:.     Epist.  ad  Philadelph. 
t  Dr.  Campbell  has  borrowed  from  the  Enquirer  above  mentioned,  a 
^reat  part  of  his  reasoning  on  this  quotation  from  Ignatius, 
\  Lecture  vii.  i]  St.  John  xvii.  21,  23. 


196  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

essential  unity  in  the  words  that  follow — '*  even  as  we  are 
one." — The  Socinian  controvertists  will,  no  doubt,  call 
this  distinction  a  "  contemptible  quibble  ;"  and  insisting 
that  the  same  "  sort"  of  unity  ought  to  be  understood  in 
both  the  clauses  of  our  Saviour's  expression,  they  will 
argue  as  fluently  in  support  of  their  opinion,  as  Dr.  Campbell 
has  done  from  what  Ignatius  says  of  there  being  "  one  altar, 
as  there  is  one  bishop ;"  an  expression,  which  no  more 
proves  the  necessity  of  there  being  but  one  congregation  in 
the  diocese  of  a  primitive  bishop,  than  St.  Paul's  exhor- 
tation to  "  glorify  God  with  one  mind  and  one  mouth,"* 
would  prove  that  all  the  congregations  of  Christians  ought 
to  have,  as  hut  one  mind  or  sentiment,  so  literally,  but  one 
mouth  to  express  it. 

Our  Lecturer,  however,  is  not  satisfied  with  the  support 
which,  on  this  point,  he  thinks  he  has  obtained  from  Igna- 
tius ;  he  even  calls  in  to  his  aid  the  authority  of  one,  to 
whom,  he  afterwards  says,  "  he  recurs  the  more  willingly, 
because  he  is  held  the  great  apostle  of  high  church."  Hav- 
ing mentioned  that  "when  the  eucharist  was  celebrated, 
the  whole  people  of  the  parish  or  bishopric,  if  we  please 
to  call  it  so,  communicated  in  the  same  congregation,  and 
all  received  the  sacrament,  if  not  from  the  hands  of  the 
bishop,  at  least  under  his  eye  j"f  he  immediately  adds— 

*  Rom.  XV.  6. 

t  Nay,  and  partook  also,  according  to  Dr.  Campbell,  of  one  and  the 
same  loaf;  for  so  we  are  told  in  his  Translation  of  the  Gospels,  vol.  ii. 
p.  450,  where  we  meet  with  the  following  note  on  St.  Mat.  xxvi.  26. 
"  The  loaf—zov  oc{]qv  E.  T.  bread.  Had  it  been  afiov  without  the  article, 
it  might  have  been  rendered  either  bread  or  a  loaf.  But  as  it  has  the  ar- 
ticle, we  must,  if  we  would  fully  express  the  sense,  say  the  loaf.  Pro- 
bably on  such  occasions  one  loaf,  larger  or  smaller,  according  to  the  com- 
pany, was  part  of  the  accustomed  preparation.  This  practice,  at  least 
in  the  apostolic  age,  seems  to  have  been  adopted  in  the  church,  in 
commemorating  Christ's  death.  To  this  it  is  very  probable  the  apostle 
alludes,  1  Cor.  x.  17. — 'Olt  «?  a^lo,,  h  a-^i^a  hi  taoXKoi  ectju-ev  hi  ya,^  irccvrs.-: 
Vila  Evof  a^l&f  /xe1e;)^oju.ej';  that  is — JBecause  there  is  one  loaf,  ive,  though 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^  197 

^  Hence  it  was  that  the  setting  up  another  altar  within  the 
limits  of  his  parish,  beside  the  one  altar  of  the  bishop,  was 
considered  as  the  great  criterion  of  schism;"^  a  crite- 
rion evidently  drawn  from  those  passages  of  the  works  of 
Cyprian,  in  which  he  describes  a  schismatic  as  one,  "  who, 
despising  the  bishops,  and  leaving  the  priests  of  God,  dares 
to  set  up  another  altar,  and  to  offer  up  different,  and  un- 
authorized prayers  ;"t  and  again  declares — that  "  no  other 
altar  can  be  erected,  no  new  priesthood  constituted,  besides 
the  one  altar,  and  the  one  priesthood."}  These,  and  such 
like  passages  from  the  works  of  Cyprian,  if  brought  forward 
in  support  of  Dr.  Cambpell's  opinion  with  respect  to  what 
he  calls  "  parochial  Episcopacy,"  must  be  treated  with 
great  violence,  before  they  can  be  wrested  to  a  purpose  so 
different  from  that  for  which  they  were  originally  designed, 
and  which  is  uniformly  displayed  in  the  writings  of  the 
primitive  fathers,  every  where  exhibiting  this  plain  and  ob-. 
vious  truth,  that  the  unity  of  the  bishop,  of  the  altar,  and 
of  prayer,  is  all  founded  on  the  common  principle  of  the 


"tnany,  are  one  body,  for  ire  all  partahe  of  the  one  loaf.  It  is  in  the  common 
Iranslatlon — For  we,  being  many,  are  one  bread  arui  one  body ;  for  u-e  arc 
nil  partakers  of  that  one  bread.  Passing  at  present  some  other  excep- 
tions, which  might  be  made  to  this  version,  there  is  no  propriety  in  say- 
ing one  bread,  more  than  in  saying  one  water  or  ojie  -wine.'*  And  we 
may  add — there  is  as  little  propriety  in  building  so  much  on  the  article 
in  this  passage  of  St.  Matthew,  when,  in  the  parallel  places  of  St.  Mark, 
St.  Luke,  and  St.  Paul's  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  the  word  oc^lov 
is  used  luitbout  the  article :  Nor  do  we  see  much  probability,  that  one  loaf 
could  have  been  found  suffic  ently  large,  even  for  the  three  thoiisand  souU, 
•who  are  said  (Acts  ii  41,  42.)  to  have  •'  continued  steadfastly  in  the 
apostolic  breauing  of  bread,"  much  less  for  the  many  thousands,  who 
were  soon  after  "  added  unto  them." 

*  Lecture  vi. 

t  "  Contemptis  Episcopis,  et  Dei  sacerdotibus  derelictis,  constituere 
audet  aliud  altare,  precem  alteram  illicitis  vocibus  sacere." — De  Unitate 
JEcclesine. 

\  Aliud  altare  constitui  aut  sacerdotium  novum  fieri,  praeter  ununi 
altare,  et  unum  sacerdotium,  non  potest. — ^Cypr.  epist.  43. 


198  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

unity  of  the  Christian  priesthood.  And  it  has  been  justly 
observed,  that  no  uninspired  writer  "  ever  so  unlocked  the 
evangelical  secret  of  this  catholic  and  Christian  unity,  as 
the  inimitable  Cyprian  has  done."^  Of  this  we  have  a 
very  striking  proof  in  that  admirable  passage,  which  has 
been  so  often  quoted  by  the  writers  on  this  subject:-— 
"  The  Episcopate  is  one^  of  which  every  bishop  holds  a 
part,  so  as  to  have  a  concern  in,  or  be  interested  for,  the 
whole.  The  church  also  is  one^  which  by  a  fruitful  increase 
grows  up  into  a  multitude  of  members  ;  as  the  sun  has  many 
rays,  yet  but  one  fountain  of  light ;  or  as  a  tree  may  have 
many  branches,  yet  but  one  root  fixed  deep  in  the  earth ;  or  as 
when  man}^  streams  descend  from  one  fountain,  they  appear 
indeed  divided  in  their  number,  yet  all  preserve  the  unity 
of  their  original."f  So  is  it,  with  respect  to  the  unity  of 
the  Christian  church,  which,  though  distinguished  in  its 
principle  by  the  several  primitive  expressions  of  one  churchy 
isne  altar ^  and  one  bishops  will  always  be  found  to  consist 
with  as  many  churches,  altars  and  bishops,  as  can  be  proved 
to  derive  their  order,  institution  and  authority  from  the 
same  sacred  source,  the  Bishop  of  souls,  and  Founder  of 
the  church ;  the  unity  of  whose  divine  power  and  spirit, 
diffused  at  first  among  the  chosen  twelve,  is  still  preserved 


*  See  the  Original  Draught  of  the  Primitive  Church,  which  contains  a 
full  and  satisfactory  answer  to  the  JStiquirer,  is^c.  above  mentioned. 

t  "  Episcopatus  unus  est,  cujus  a  singulis  in  solidum  pars  tenetur. 
Ecclesia  quoque  una  est,  quae  in  multitudinem  latius  incremento  fxcundi- 
tatis  extenditur;  quo  modo  soils  multi  radii,  sed  lumen  unum  ;  et  rami 
arboris  multi,  sed  robur  ununi  tenaci  radice  fundatum ;  et  cum  de  fonte 
imo  rivi  plurimi  defluunt,  numerositas  licet  diffusa  videatur,  exundantis 
copix  largitate,  unitas  tamen  servatur  in  origine."  Cypi*.  De  Unitate 
Ecdesice.  In  a  note  on  this  passage,  Mr.  Marshall,  the  translator,  observes, 
"  that  the  words  in  solidum  are  forensic,  and  allude  to  the  case  of  divers 
contractors,  each  of  whom  was  bound  not  only  for  his  proportionable 
part,  but  if  the  rest  failed,  was  to  make  gocd  the  whole." — By  this  ac- 
count, the  bishops  will  be  found  to  hold  their  part  of  the  Episcopate,  as 
we  say,  conjunctly  and  severally. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  199 

among  those  who  have  regularly  succeeded  to  them,  in  the 
commission,  which  they  received  from  Christ.  Hence  it 
necessarily  follows,  that  the  unity  of  every  regular  congre- 
gation of  Christians,  consist  in  their  having  the  ministerial 
offices,  with  which  they  are  supplied,  performed  by  a  per- 
son duly  authorized  for  that  purpose,  and  acting  under  the 
appointment  and  direction  of  those  who,  as  rightful 
bishops,  have  "  authority  given  unto  them  in  the  church,  to 
call  and  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's  vineyard." 

We  have  now  taken  notice  of  the  principal  arguments, 
to  which  Dr.  Campbell  has  recurred;  for  they  have  all  been 
made  use  of  before,  to  show,  that  the  primitive  bishop,  in 
the  period  which  he  has  fixed  for  his  "  parochial  Episco- 
pacy," was  no  other  than  the  pastor  of  a  single  congrega- 
tion or  parish,  with  the  presbyters  assisting  as  his  curates. 
And  after  all  the  pains  he  has  taken  to  adjust  his  plan  of 
the  primitive  bishopric  to  the  modem  presbyterian  parish, 
we  find  him  still  obliged  to  own,  that  "  the  resemblance 
does  not  hold  in  every  particular ;  though,"  he  says,  ^*  it 
plainly  does  in  most ;"  and  then  adds — "  perhaps  in  some 
things,  the  case  may  bear  a  greater  analogy  to  some  highland 
parishes  in  this  northern  part  of  the  island,  wherein,  by 
reason  of  their  ten-itorial  extent,  the  pastor  is  under  the 
necessity  of  having  ordained  itinerant  assistants,  whom  he 
can  send  as  occasion  requires,  to  supply  his  place  in  the 
remote  parts  of  his  charge."* — The  fitness  of  this  analogy 
we  shall  in  part  admit,  as  it  corresponds  pretty  nearly  with 
the  ideas  which  we  have  been  taught  to  form  of  primitive 
Episcopacy;  conceiving  it  to  be  almost  in  the  Doctor's 
own  words — "  One  ordained  pastor  having  power  to  send 
out  ordained  assistants  to  supply  his  place,  as  occasion  re- 
quires." But  as  Christianity  began  in  cities,  and  popu- 
lous countries,  and  it  was  a  long  time  before  it  reached 
such  uncultivated  tracts  as  are  to  be  found  in  the  northern 

*  Lecture  vH. 


200  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

parts  of  this  island,  it  is  chiefly  with  these  populous  settle- 
ments that  we  are  at  present  concerned,  such  as  the  church, 
parish,  or  diocese  of  Jerusalem,  where  the  bishop  must 
have  had  many  congregations  of  Christians  to  superintend, 
and  therefore  many  presbyters  acting  under  him  in  the 
discharge  of  their  ministerial  duties. 

Indeed,  our  Professor  seems  to  admit  as  much,  in  that 
passage  of  his  Lecture  now  before  us,  where  he  observes, 
that  "  as  the  whole  of  the  bishop's  parish  generally  received 
the  symbols  of  Christ's  body  and  blood,  mediately  or  im- 
mediately from  his  hand,  so  they  were,  for  the  most  part, 
baptized  either  bv  him,  or  in  his  presence."     Here  the 
words  "  generallif  and  "/£>r  the  most  part'''  plainly  imply, 
that  sometimes  the  case  was  otherwise,  and  a  kind  of  similar 
acknowledgment  is  made  by  what  is  said  of  their  "  receiving 
the  symbols  mediately  from  the  hand  of  the   bishop."     By 
this  expression  we  cannot  properly  understand  any  thing 
else  but  the  mediation  or  intervention  of  the  presbyters,  as 
his  "  ordained  assistants."     And  if  receiving  from  their 
hands  at  the  other  end  of  such  a  capacious  room  as  could 
contain  thausands  of  communicants,  according  to  the  plan 
of  our  Professor,  could  be  held  the  same  as  receiving  from 
the  hand  of  the  bishop,  why  not  at  the  other  end  of  the 
street,  and  so  on  to  any  distance  to  which  his  Episcopal 
charge  might  extend  ?    It  must  be  remembered,  that  we  are 
presently  alluding  to  the  "  parochial  Episcopacy"  of  Jeru- 
salem, in  which  parish,  however,  from  the  account  given 
of  it  in  scripture,  we  must  think  it  next  to  impossible,  even 
had  it  been  expedient,  which  at  that  time  it  certainly  was 
not,  that  the  three  thousand,  ihtfve  thousand,  yea  the  many 
thousands  of  believers,  or  parishioners^  should  meet  in  one 
place,  for  the  purposes  of  public  worship,  or  form  but  one 
congregation. 

It  may  well  be  supposed,  that  in  these  variable  times  of 
the  gospel,  when  the  churches  had  now  and  then  a  little 
rest,  and  were  multiplied,  but  much,  oftener  were  scattered 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  ^1 

by  distress  and  persecution,  there  would  be  some  Episcopal 
charges,  whether  we  call  them  by  the  name  of  pansh  or 
diocese,  where  the  bishop  could  easily  meet  with  his  whole 
flock  in  one  place,  and  perform  every  part  of  his  official 
duty  to  them  in  person.  Dr.  Campbell  has  taken  care  to 
furnish  us  with  an  instance  of  this  kind,*^  in  what  he  calls 
the  "  extensive  diocese  of  Neocesaria,"  where  Tillemont, 
he  says,  "  hath  shown  from  Basil  and  Gregor\'  of  Nyssa, 
both  natives  of  Cappadocia,  that  in  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  there  were  no  more  than  seventeen  believers,  who 
probably  all  resided  in  the  city ;"  and  then  asks — '•''  Could 
fewer  be  properly  associated  into  one  congregation  ?"t  ^^^ 
he  has  forgot  to  mention,  what  the  same  Basil  and  Gregory 
relate,  whether  Tillemont  hath  shown  it  or  not,  that  the 
bishop  assigned  to  the  charge  of  Neocesaria,  the  famous 
Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  who  had  himself  been  converted 
by  Origen,  left  at  his  death  onlv  seventeen  pagans  in  all 
that  "  extensive  diocese :"  And  the  consequence,  we  are 
told,  was,  that  the  "  zealous  citizens  pulled  down  their 
altars,  temples  and  idols,  and  in  every  place  built  houses 
of  prayer  in  the  name  of  Christ."J 

*  The  historian  Gibbon  had  mentioned  the  same  instance,  and  almost 
in  the  same,  words. — See  vol.  ii.  of  the  8vo.  edition  of  his  History  of  the 
Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,  p.  360 ;  where,  after  acknowledg- 
ing what,  he  says,  "  we  may  learn  from  the  writings  of  Lucian,  a  philo- 
sopher who  had  studied  mankind,  and  who  describes  their  manners  in 
the  most  lively  colours,  that  under  the  reign  of  Commodus,  his  native 
country  of  Pontus  was  filled  with  Epicureans  and  Christians,''^  he  adds  in 
a  note,  "  Christianity,  however,  must  have  been  very  unequally  ditiused 
over  Pontus,  since,  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  there  were  no 
more  than  seventeen  believers  in  the  extensive  diocese  of  Neo-Caesarea. 
See  M.  de  Tillemont,  Memoires  Ecclesiast  torn  iv.  p.  675,  from  Basil 
and  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  who  were  themselves  natives  of  Cappadocia." 
This  is  one  of  many  proofs  that  might  be  adduced  of  a  peculiar  "  coin- 
cidence in  sentiment"  between  our  theological  Professor,  and  that  cele- 
brated historian,  whose  sceptical  opinions  are  not  likely  to  procure  him 
any  admiration  among  the  real  friends  of  Christianity. 

t  Lecture  vii. 

\  Gregor.  N)  ssen.  in  Vit.  Thaumat.  torn.  iii.  p.  567.  Paris  ^dit.  1638. 
26 


^02  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

'  An  earlier  writer  too  than  Gregory  Nyssen,  the  same 
Tertullian,  to  whom  Dr.  Campbell  has  frequently  referred, 
as  favouring  some  of  his  sentiments,  mentions  the  Chris- 
tians, even  in  his  early  age,  as  *'  so  numerous,  as  almost 
to  constitute  the  greater  part  of  every  city  j"*  and  in  his 
apology  to  the  Roman  magistrates,  he  does  not  hesitate  to 
speak  of  the  great  multitudes  of  his  profession,  in  these 
confident  terms.  "  We  are  of  yesterday  j  yet  every  place 
is  filled  with  us  ;  your  cities,  your  islands,  your  forts,  your 
corporations  and  councils,  even  the  armies,  tribes  and 
companies,  yea  the  palace,  senate,  and  courts  of  justice  ; 
the  temples  only  have  we  left  to  you.— Should  we  go  off, 
and  separate  from  you,  you  would  stand  amazed  at  your 
own  desolation,  be  affrighted  at  your  solitary  state,  the 
stagnation  of  your  affairs,  and  the  stupor  of  death,  which 
had  in  a  manner  seized  your  city."t  What  a  strange  ac- 
count must  this  have  appeared  to  the  magistrates  of  Rome, 
if  their  great  city  was  found  to  contain,  instead  of  such 
prodigious  numbers,  no  more  than  a  single  congregation  of 
Christians  ?  The  same  observation  may  be  made  on  what 
Eusebius  says,  in  general,  of  the  Christian  churches  in 
every  city  and  country,  about  the  close  of  the  apostolic 
age,  when  he  uses  such  singular  terms  to  express  their 
amazing  numbers,  and  compares  "  their  thronged  and 
crowded  societies  to  grain  heaped  upon  a  barn  floor."J  It 
will  be  no  easy  matter  to  reconcile  this  report  of  a  very  well 

*  Tanta  hominum  multitudo,  pars  pcene  onajor  cujtisque  civitatis.  Ter- 
tul.  ad  Scap.  c.  2. 

•}•  **  Hesterni  sumus,  et  vestra  omnia  implevimus;  urbes,  insulas,  cas- 
tella,  municipia,  conciliabula,  castra  ipsa,  tribus,  decurias,  palatium,  se- 
natum,  forum;  sola  vobis  reliquimus  templa.     St  tanta  vis  hominum  in 

aliquem  crbis  remoti  sinum  abrupissemus  a  vobis proculdubio  expa- 

vissetis  ad  solitudinem  vestram,  ad  silentium  rerum,  et  stuporem  quen- 
dam  quasi  mortui  uvbis  "     Tertul.  Apol.  p.  33.  cap.  of. 

:j:  This  gives  but  imperfectly  the  sense  of  the  original,  Kat  orila.  mcc 

7rX?i9?tj  aS^oa;,-  viKXri^iVA  <Tvn{lnKi^uv,    Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  ii.  c  ?• 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy',  203 

informed  and  accurate  author,  with  our  Professor's  imagi- 
nary calculation,  by  which  he  attempts  to  show  that  "  one  . 
of  the  primitive  bishoprics,  in  order  to  afford  a  congrega- 
tion equal  to  that  of  a  middling  parish,  must  have  been 
equal  in  extent  to  thirty  parishes  in  this  island." 

Having  already  discovered  the  extreme  weakness  of  the 
materials,  and  want  of  solidity  in  the  foundation,  on  which 
this  strange  position  is  built ;  and  being  thereby  sufficiently 
guarded  against  any  conclusion  that  may  be  drawn  from 
such  doubtful  and  dangerous  premises,  we  may  be  excused 
from  following  our  learned  Lecturer  through  all  the  minute 
descriptions  of  his  parochial  plan  of  Episcopacy  ;  especi- 
ally as,  by  his  own  confession,  there  is  no  complete  resem- 
blance or  conformity  to  it,  in  that  established  system,  under 
the  protection  of  which  he  made  such  a  distinguished 
figure.  The  difference  indeed,  we  could  easily  show  in  a 
number  of  instances,  if  it  were  not  more  our  concern  to 
defend  the  soundness  of  our  own,  than  to  expose  the  de- 
fects of  other  systems  ;  or  if  we  may  be  allowed  to  adopt 
the  language  of  him  who  has  attacked  us,  and  say — "  It  is 
neither  our  province,  nor  humour,  to  trace  nonsense  through 
all  its  dark  and  devious  windings."^  There  is  still,  how- 
ever, one  part  of  our  Professor's  specious  theory,  of  which 
we  cannot  well  omit  to  take  some  notice,  as  it  seems  to 
touch  the  main  hinge  of  the  controversy,  and  may  serve  as 
a  farther  specimen  of  the  skill  and  address  with  which  the 
other  parts  are  constructed. 

The  point  to  which  I  am  alluding,  occupies,  in  one  way 
or  other,  all  that  remains  of  the  seventh  Lecture,  part  of 
which  we  have  already  considered,  and  is  introduced  by 
the  Lecturer's  "  returning  to  the  administration  of  religious 
ordinances  in  those  primitive  parishes,"  which  he  had  been 
describing.     After  having  told  us,  that  "  the  presbyters 


*  See  Dr.  Campbeirs  application  of  this  remark  to  thfe  pious  and 
eminently  learned  Mr.  Henry  Dodwell,  Lecture  iv. 


26ft  Genera!  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

executed  certain  ministerial  offices,  in  those  parts  of  the 
parish  to  which  the  bishop  found  it  reasonable  to  send 
them,  and  also  assisted  him  in  the  public  offices  of  religion; 
^lat  when  he  was  sick,  or  otherwise  necessarily  absent, 
they  supplied  his  place,  and  as  the  charge  of  the  parish 
was  eminently  devolved  upon  him,  they  acted  in  all  the  mi- 
nisterial duties  by  his  direction,  or  at  least  with  his  permis- 
sion ;"  he  immediately  adds — ^''  The  only  question  of  mo- 
ment that  has  been  raised  on  this  head  is,  whether  by  his 
order  or  allowance,  they  could  exercise  every  part  of  the 
pastoral  office  as  well  as  the  bishop,  or  whether  there  were 
some  things,  such  as  ordaining  others  to  the  ministry, 
which  even  his  commands  could  not  empower  them  to  dof ' 
On  this  veiy  important  question,  the  learned  Professor 
gives  his  own  opinion  directly  in  these  words — "  As  the 
power  of  the  bishops  arose,  and  that  of  the  presbyters  sunk 
gradually,  I  am  disposed  to  think,  that  in  the  course  of 
two  centuries,  or  even  a  century  and  a  half,  there  was  a 
considerable  difference  in  this  itspect,  in  the  state  of  things, 
at  the  beginning,  and  at  the  end.  Towards  the  conclusion 
of  that  period,  I  imagine,  it  became  very  unusual  for  a 
bishop  to  delegate  this,  which  was  ever  looked  upon  as 
the  most  sacred,  and  most  momentous  trust,  to  his  pres- 
byters. The  transition  is  very  natural  from  seldom  to 
never,  and  in  our  ways  of  judging,  the  transition  is  as  na- 
tural from  what  never  is  done,  to  what  cannot  lawfully  be 
done."^ 

Now,  what  is  all  this,  but  mere  declamation,  or  a  fan- 
ciful train  of  reasoning,  founded  upon  gratuitous  assump- 
tions, and  confirmed  by  the  author's  own  "  imaginings^ 
and  dispositions  to  think^"*  so  and  so,  without  any  thing  of- 
fered in  the  way  of  proof,  or  even  of  illustration?  The 
period  which  he  has  assigned  for  the  operation  of  his  "  na- 
tural transition,"  we  cannot  help  thinking,  is  very  ambi- 

*  Lecture  vii. 


I        General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  205 

guously  defined.  He  is  willing  to  reduce  it  to  "  a  century 
and  a  half,"  and  yet  finds  a  considerable  difference  in  the 
state  "  of  things  at  the  begijiningy  and  at  the  end."  That 
period  undoubtedly  began  with  the  birth  of  Christ ;  so  that 
the  thirty-three  years  of  his  life  must  be  struck  out  of  the 
calculation,  as  must  also  be  the  subsequent  years  to  the 
death  of  St.  John,  the  apostle  ;  and  then  the  "  course  of  a 
century  and  a  half,"  will  be  reduced  to  little  more  than  half 
a  centur}%  which  is  rather  a  short  period  for  effecting  such 
a  considerable  change  as  our  author  alludes  to,  in  the  go- 
vernment of  the  church.  When  he  tells  us — **  that  the 
power  of  the  bishops  arose,  and  that  of  the  presbyters  sunk 
gradually;"  should  he  not  have  mentioned  more  particu- 
larly, for  the  information  of  his  pupils,  what  it  was  that 
thus  raised  the  bishops  and  sunk  the  presbyters,  even  in 
a  gradual  manner?  There  were  then  no  flattering  Con- 
stantines, — none  of  those  imperial  edicts,  which  he  in- 
veighs so  bitterly  against,  to  create  or  support  such  a  dan- 
gerous ascendancy  in  the  first  of  these  ecclesiastical  orders 
above  the  second.  If  it  was  entirely  owing  to  "  seniority, 
or  superior  merit,  or  distinguished  talents,"  as  our  Lec- 
turer seems  to  think  '^  probable,"  what  an  insignificant  race 
must  those  presbjters  have  been,  none  of  whom  could  ever 
be  found  to  possess  "  merit  or  talents"  sufficient  to  pre- 
serve their  power  from  sinking,  or  rather  being  totally 
swallowed  up  in  that  gulph  of  Episcopal  dominion,  from 
which  it  was  never  to  rise  again  I 

Our  author  indeed  "  imagines,"  (but  without  assigning 
any  ground  for  such  an  imagination)  that  towards  the  con- 
clusion of  his  "  century  and  a  half,"  it  became  very  unusual 
for  a  bishop  "  to  delegate  the  trust  of  ordination  to  his 
presbyters  ;"  and  yet  we  shall  soon  find  him  endeavouring 
to  fix  this  unusual  practice,  even  upon  "  the  great  apostle 
of  High-church  himself,"  a  whole  century  after  the  period 
to  which  he  is  here  referring.  But  the  strangest  inconsist- 
ency^  and  most  illogical  piece  of  reasoning  in  all  that  portion 


206  General  Defence  of  Eptscopaeyl 

of  Dr.  Campbell's  Lectures  now  under  our  consideration, 
is  that  which  follows  in  these  words — "  We  know,  that 
some  time  after  the  period  to  which  I  have  here  confined 
myself,  ordination  by  presbyters  was  prohibited,  and  de- 
clared null  by  ecclesiastical  canons.  But  the  very  prohibi- 
tions themselves,  the  very  assertions  of  those  whom  they 
condemned  as  heretics,  prove  the  practice,  then  probably 
wearing,  but  not  quite  worn  out."^  And  it  is  well,  we 
say,  for  those  who  maintain  the  necessity  of  Episcopal 
ordination,  that  its  modern  rival,  ordination  by  presbyters, 
was  prohibited  so  early,  as  even  our  Lecturer's  vague 
expression  must  mean,  "  if  it  mean  any  thing." — ^^But  we 
know  not  well  what  opinion  to  give  of  the  manner  in  which 
he  accounts  for  these  prohibitions,  and  which  appears  liable 
to  some  objection  in  the  terms  made  use  of  to  define  it, 
and  much  more  in  the  consequences  that  may  be  deduced 
from  lU 

If  by  the .  terms,  in  which  it  is  expressed,  we  are  to 
understand  that  "  the  prohibitions  themselves  prove  the 
practice  to  be  then  probably  wearing,  but  not  quite  worn 
owf,"  we  must  object  to  that  sort  of  evidence,  which  esta- 
blishes no  sort  of  connection  between  the  proof  and  the' 
thing  to  be  proved :  and  we  might  say,  on  much  better 
ground,  if  probability  be  all  the  point  in  question,  that  the 
prohibitions  rather  prove  the  practice  to  be  ^tn  probably 
wearing  m,  and  beginning  to  require  correction. — But  if  it 
be  the  practice  itself  which  is  meant  to  be  proved,  not  only 
by  the  prohibitions  themselves,  but  "  by  the  very  assertions 
of  those  whom  they  condemned  as  heretics,"  might  it  not 
be  expected,  that  our  Professor  would  have  let  his  pupils 
know,  whether  the  authors  of  these  "  assertions,"  some  of 
whom  he  ought  to  have  named,  were  really  heretics,  or 
only  condemned  as  such,  by  those  who  had  prohibited  the 
practice,  to  which  he  was  here  referring  ?    His  statement 

*  Lecture  vii. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^  207 

of  the  case,  on  the  contrary,  is  dark  and  dubious,  where 
the  nature  of  the  subject  required  that  his  sentiments  should 
have  been  delivered  in  clear  and  explicit  terms.  He  was 
sensible,  no  doubt,  of  the  ticklish  ground  on  which  he 
was  treading,  and,  therefore,  contrived  to  make  use  of  lan- 
guage, not  so  plain,  and  unequivocal,  as  might  have  been 
looked  for.  Yet  even  to  insinuate  that  the  assertions  of 
condemned  heretics  serve  to  prove  their  innocence,  or  the 
lawfulness  of  that,  which  they  were  condemned  for  main- 
taining, is  a  tenet  rather  of  dangerous  consequence,  and 
not  such  as  might  be  expected  from  an  established  theo- 
logical chair.  Did  the  assertions  of  the  Arian  heretics, 
when  condemned  by  the  council  of  Nice,  prove  their  doc- 
trine to  be  then  only  "  wearing,  but  not  quite  worn  out?" 
Were  there  no  novelties  in  these  old  times,  which,  on 
their  very  first  appearance,  were  stigmatized  3s  heresies  I 
And  might  not  this  fancy  of  admitting  *'  ordination  by 
presbyters,"  have  been  but  a  novelty,  when  it  was  first  pro- 
hibited, at  least  for  any  thing  that  Dr.  Campbell  has  pro- 
duced to  show  the  antiquity  of  its  origin,  or  the  continu- 
ance of  its  practice  ?  Or  did  the  church,  so  early  as  the 
period  "  to  which  he  has  here  confined  himself,"  make 
canons  against  apostolic  institution,  and  primitive  usage, 
when  "  wearing,  but  not  quite  worn  out  ?"  I'hese  are 
questions,  which,  connected  as  they  evidently  are  with 
"  the  most  sacred  and  momentous  trust,"  it  was  the  busi- 
ness of  our  learned  Lecturer  to  have  discussed  with  a  de- 
gree of  seriousness  and  attention,  suitable  to  the  dignity 
and  importance  of  the  subject,  and  not  to  have  left  his 
hearers  without  any  other  impression  on  their  minds,  than 
what  arises  from  the  authority  of  a  great  name^  which,  he 
himself  has  repeatedly  told  us,  "  has  greater  influence  on 
the  opinions  of  the  generality  of  men,  than  most  people 
are  aware  of." 

In  the  course  of  our  inquiries  into  the  ecclesiastical  his- 
tory of  the  first  three  or  four  centuries,  we  meet  with  an 


908  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

instance  of  one  CoUuthus,  a  presbyter  of  Alexandria,  who^ 
pretending  to  have  been  promoted  to  the  office  of  a  bishop, 
began  to  encroach  on  the  Episcopal  power  of  ordination, 
but  was  soon  brought  to  see  his  error,  and  having  renoimced 
his  schism,  was  again  admitted  to  communion  as  a  presby- 
ter. This  happened  about  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, and  so  far  from  being  considered  as  a  "  practice  then 
wearing  out,"  it  is  expressly  mentioned  as  th^frst  attempt 
of  that  kind.  Some  time  after  we  read  of  another  presby- 
ter, Aerius,  who,  as  a  judicious  writer  observes,  "  seek- 
ing to  be  made  a  bishop,  could  not  brook  that  another  was 
preferred  before  him  ;  and,  therefore,  when  he  saw  himself 
unable  to  rise  to  that  greatness,  which  his  ambitious  pride 
did  affect,  his  way  of  revenge  was  to  try,  what  wit,  being 
sharpened  with  envy  and  malice,  could  do,  in  raising  a  new 
and  seditious  opinion,  that  the  superiority  which  bishops 
had,  was  a  thing  which  they  should  not  have,  there  being 
no  necessary  distinction  between  them  and  presbyters."* 
For  holding  and  striving  to  propagate  this  new  opinion, 
which  Epiphanius  imputes  to  his  ignorance  of  the  scrip- 
tures, Aerius  was  not  only  branded  as  a  heretic^  but  con- 
sidered as  no  other  than  a  madman ;  for  "  how  was  it  possi- 
ble," said  those  who  argued  against  him,  "  that  he  should 
constitute  or  ordain  a  presbyter,  who  had  no  authority  to 
impose  hands  in  ordination  ?"f 

In  opposition,  however,  to  these  facts  (though  facts  are 
usually  reckoned  stubborn  things)  our  Lecturer  produces 
some  extracts  from  the  works  of  contemporary  writers, 
sufficient,  as  he  thinks,  to  establish  his  own  opinion ;  and 
"  that  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  the  presbyters 
were  still  considered  as  vested  with  the  power  of  conferring 


•  See  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Politic,  book  vii.  p.  25. 

T  lift/,-  otovjs  ti'y  Tov  Tr^Ecr/Si/lff ov  Ka9i?av  ^»j  Ixpvloi,  x,'^foQs;KX.v  ra  p^si^olomv* 
Epiphanius  Hseres.  Ixw  p  908— as  quoted  by  Archbishop  Potter  in  hir, 
Ciiscowse  on  Church  CoTcrnmenty  p.  293. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  209 

orders,"  he  says,  "  has  been  plausibly  argued  from  an  ex- 
pression of  Firmilian,  in  his  letter  to  C3  prian  ;"  which  ex- 
pression is  thus  translated  by  the  "  plausible  arguer,"  whom 
he,  no  doubt,  had  in  his  eye.* — "  All  power  and  grace  is 
constituted  in  the  church,  where  seniors  preside,  who  have 
the  power  of  baptizing,  confirming  and  ordaining."'|'  Now, 
says  Dr.  Campbell,  "  that  by  majores  natu^  in  Latin"  (here 
rendered  seniors),  "  is  meant  the  same  with  '7t^z<j^v\i^oi  in 
Greek"  (or  presb3rters),  "  of  which  it  is  indeed  a  literal  ver- 
sion, can  scarcely  be  thought  questionable.  Besides,  the 
phrase  so  exactly  coincides  with  that  of  Tertullian,  who 
says — Probati  prsesident  seniores — approved  elders  preside, 
— as  to  make  the  application,  if  possible,  still  clearer." J 
Yet  we  cannot  help  thinking,  that  more  illustration  is  still 
wanting ;  and  that  no  person,  who  reads  with  attention  the 
whole  of  this  epistle  of  Firmilian's  to  Cyprian,  and  pro- 
perly considers  the  nature  of  the  subject  on  which  he  wrote, 
can  have  any  doubt,  that  by  the  "  seniors,  who  i)reside  in 
the  church,"  he  certainly  meant  the  bishops^  as  being  the 
only  presidents,  who  were  acknowledged  to  "  have  the 
power  of  confirming  and  ordaining,"  as  well  as  of  bap- 
tizing, and  to  whom  he  plainly  refers  a  little  after,  when 
mentioning  St.  Paul  as  surely  "  not  inferior  to  the  bishops 
of  whom  he  had  been  speaking."||  It  is  equally  certain, 
that  by  Tertullian's  "  approved  presidents,"  could  only  be 
meant  the  bishops  or  heads  of  the  several  churches  within 
the  Roman  empire  ;  since  he  was  clearly  of  opinion,  that 
the  apostles  had  placed  bishops  in  all  the  churches  which 
they  had  planted,  and  adduced  those  of  Smyrna  and  Rome 

*  See  t\\e  Enquiry  into  the  Constitution,  ISfc.  of  the  Primitive  Churchy  so 
frequently  copied  by  Dr.  Campbell. 

t  "  Quando  omnis  potestas  et  gratia  in  ecclesia  constltuta  sit,  ubi  prae- 
sident  majores  natu,  qui  et  baptizandi,  et  manum  imponendi,  et  ordi- 
nandi possident  potestatem."     Cyprian.  Epist.  75. 

I  Lecture  vii. 

!j  "  Nisi  si  his  Episcopis  de  qiiibus  nunc,  minor  fuit  Paulus." 

2r 


MO  General  Deferice  of  Episcopacy, 

as  instances,  although  he  saw  no  occasion  for  calling  them 
by  that  name,  in  the  apology  which  he  was  now  offering 
to  the  Roman  governors. 

But  what  we  think  most  surprising  in  all  that  part  of  Dr. 
Campbell's  Lectures,  now  more  immediately  before  us,  is 
the  readiness  with  which  he  recurs  to  the  authority  of  Cy- 
prian.— -This  cannot  so  well  be  accounted  for,  as  by  ob- 
scrv^ing,  that  the  only  passage  which  he  quotes  from  that 
venerable  writer,  as  favouring  the  validity  of  ordination  by 
presbyters,  was  made  use  of,  for  the  same  purpose,  by  his 
great  friend  and  oracle,  the  author  of  the  "  Enquiry  into 
the  Constitution^  ^c,  of  the  Primitive  Church^^^ — We  find 
him  arguing  just  as  Dr.  Campbell  has  done,  from  part  of 
a  letter  addressed  by  Cyprian  to  his  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons at  Carthage,  in  which  "  he,  in  the  most  earnest  and 
pressing  terms,  intreats  them,  during  his  absence,  to  dis- 
charge what  was  incumbent  both  on  themselves,  and  on 
him,  in  such  a  manner,  as  that  nothing  might  be  wanting, 
either  as  to  discipline  or  diligence."')'  Now,  says  our 
Professor, — ^^  is  it  to  be  supposed,  that  he  would  have  so 
expressly  enjoined  them,  without  exception  or  limitation,  to 
discharge  the  duties  of  his  function,  as  well  as  their  own,  if 
neither  presbyters  nor  deacons  could  do  any  thing  in  ordi- 
nation, that  part,  which  was  the  chief  of  all  ?"J  And  we 
may  ask  in  return,  if  ordination  was  included  in  those  du- 
ties, which  they  were  to  discharge,  is  it  to  be  supposed, 
that  he  would  not  have  made  an  exception  with  respect  to 
his  deacons;  as  they  could  have  no  pretensions  to  the  power 
of  ordaining,  even  on  Dr.  Campbell's  principles,  who  had 
just  before  been  observing,  "  that  there  was  no  occasion 
for  making  canons  against  ordination  by  deacons,  or  by 

*  See  the  Enquiry,  ISc.  p.  62. 

t  "  Quoniam  niihi  interesse  nunc  non  permittit  loci  conditio,  peto  vos 
pro  fide  et  religione  vestra,  fungajnini  illic  et  vestris  partibus  et  meis,  ut 
nihil  vel  ad  disciplinam,  vd  ad  djligentiam  desit."     Cypr.  Epist.  5. 

%  Lecture  vii. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  211 

laymen,  who  did  not  pretend  to  such  a  right  ?"  Yet  here 
he  adds — "  Might  it  not  be  justly  thought,  that  if  Cyprian 
meant  to  except  ordination,  he  would  have  given  them 
some  hint  in  this  letter,  what  method,  in  case  of  any  va^ 
eancy  in  their  presbytery,  (which  during  his  absence,  would 
be  doubly  incommodious)  they  should  take,  to  get  it 
quickly  and  properly  supphed  ?"  And  we  may  easily  dis- 
cover the  reason,  why  no  such  hint  was  given,  by  a  careful 
perusal  of  the  letter  itself,  which  was  evidently  written  for 
the  sake  of  recommending  to  his  clergy  a  quiet  and  prudent 
behaviour  under  their  present  distress,  as  well  as  a  charitable 
attention  to  the  necessities  of  those  who  are  suffering  for 
their  faith  in  Christ,  but  without  any  view  to  the  case  of  a 
vacancy  in  their  presbytery,  or  the  most  proper  method  of 
getting  it  supplied. 

This  very  case,  however,  or  any  thing  similar  to  it,  we 
find  sufficiently  provided  for  in  another  of  Cj-prian's  Let- 
ters, addressed  to  two  of  his  colleagues,  Caldonius  and 
Herculanus,  neighbouring  bishops,  and  to  two  of  his  own 
presb)^ers,  Rogatianus  and  Numidicus,  appointing  these 
four  "  his  vicegerents  or  deputies,  to  inquire  into  the  ages, 
conditions  and  merits  of  the  brethren ;  that  he  whose 
proper  charge  or  business  it  was,  to  promote  men  to  ec- 
clesiastical offices,  might  be  well  informed  about  them,  and 
so  promote  none  but  such  as  were  worthy,  and  humble  and 
meek."^  By  such  an  ample  deputation  as  this,  those  en- 
trusted with  it,  including  in  their  number  two  of  the  Epis- 
copal order,  were  sufficiently  authorized  to  supply  what- 
ever vacancy  might  happen  in  any  of  the  ecclesiastical  of- 
fices, within  the  diocese  of  Carthage,  during  the  unavoid- 
able absence  of  its  proper  bishop  and  governor,  who,  we 


*  "  Cumque  ego  vos  pro  me  mcarios  mlserim — ut  xtates  eornm,  et 
conditioiies,  et  merita  discerneretis,  ut  jam,  ego,  cui  cura  incwmbity  om- 
nes  optime  nossern,  et  dignos,  atque  humiles  et  mites,  ad  eccle:iiastic<e 
administrationis  officia  promoverem."     Cypr.  Epist.  41. 


Sl^  General  Defe7ice  of  Mplscopacy* 

see,  speaks  of  himself  iii  the  singular  number,  as  the  pef-* 
Son  who  had  the  power  of  appointing  his  subordinate  offi- 
cers, and  founds  that  power  on  his  having  the  care  of  the 
church  of  Carthage  committed  to  him. 

The  same  sentiment  we  find  expressed  in  another  of  his 
letters  to  his  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  to  all  his  people, 
which  he  begins  by  telling  them,  that  "  though  in  all  cleri-* 
cal  ordinations  he  had  been  accustomed  to  consult  them 
beforehand,  and  to  examine  the  manners  and  merits  of 
every  one  with  common  advice,"*  yet  in  the  instance 
which  he  was  then  going  to  mention,  he  had  thought  pro- 
per to  depart  from  his  usual  practice,  by  ordaining  a  per- 
son without  any  such  previous  consultation,  and  now  inti- 
mated what  he  had  done,  in  the  common  style  used  by 
superiors  on  such  occasions.  This  he  repeats  in  his  next 
letter  concerning  another  oi'dination  of  the  same  kind,  by 
desiring  his  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  all  his  people,  to 
take  notice^  that  though  on  account  of  their  youth,  he  had 
appointed  these  persons  only  to  an  inferior  office  for  the 
time,  he  "  yet  designed  them  for  the  honour  of  the  pres- 
byterate,  and  to  sit  with  him  as  his  counsellors,  as  soon  as 
their  years  would  admit  of  that  promotion."t  All  which 
plainly  shows,  that  Cyprian  considered  himself,  in  his 
Episcopal  character,  as  vested  with  the  sole  power  of  or- 
dination within  his  district ;  and  it  will  not  be  easy  to  dis- 
cover, in  any  part  of  his  works,  the  least  intimation  of  his 
sharing  that  power  with  his  presbyters,  far  less  of  his  ad- 
mitting, that  they  had  sufficient  right  to  exercise  it,  as 
having  equal  authority  with  himself.  On  the  contrary ,  w& 
find  him  on  all  occasions  vindicating  and  strenuously  as- 
serting the  supreme  power  of  the  bishops  in  this,  as  w^ell 

*  "  In  ordinationibiis  clericis  solenius  vos  ante  consulere,  et  mores,  ac 
meriia  singulorum  communi  consilio  ponderare."  See  the  whole  of  Cy- 
prian's 38th  epistle  to  his  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  to  atl  his  people. 

■\  C?eternm  presbyterii  honorem,  designasse  nos  iUis  jam  sciatis-^SQS- 
suris  nobisctim,  provectis  ct  covroboratis  annis  suis,    E-pist.  39. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  213 

as  in  every  other  matter,  connected  with  the  care  and  gc* 
Vernment  of  the  church. 

This  is  particularly  observable  in  one  of  his  letters  writ- 
ten to  those  unhappy  persons,  who,  by  sacrificing  to  idols, 
had  fallen  oif  from  the  communion  of  the  church,  and  after- 
wards became  indecently  importunate,  even  with  insolent 
clamour,  to  be  restored  to  it.  After  stating  to  them  the 
manner  in  which  the  frame  of  the  church,  and  the  autho- 
rity of  its  bishops,  were  constituted  by  our  blessed  Lord, 
whose  precepts  we  ought  to  revere  and  obey,  he  adds — 
"  Thence,  in  the  course  of  time,  and  by  regular  succession 
downwards,  the  ordination  of  bishops,  and  the  constitution 
of  the  church,  are  transmitted  in  such  a  manner,  as  that  the 
church  being  built  upon  the  bishops,  all  her  public  acts  or 
affairs  may  be  ordered  by  them  as  the  chief  rulers. — Where- 
fore, since  this  is  God's  appointment,  I  cannot  but  wonder 
at  the  boldness  and  insolence  of  certain  persons,  who,  in 
writing  to  me,  have  called  themselves  a  church,  when  a 
church  is  only  to  be  found  in  the  bishop,  the  clergy,  and 
the  faithful,  or  steady  Christians."^  Such  is  the  reason- 
ing made  use  of  by  this  admirable  writer,  to  show  the  ne- 
cessity of  maintaining  communion  with  the  bishop,  as  the 
jmeans  of  preserving  that  principle  of  unity  in  the  church, 
which  is  essential  to  its  very  existence.  And  this  we  find 
him  again  recommending  very  strongly,  in  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  all  his  people  on  the  breaking  out  of  a  lamenta- 
ble schism  in  his  diocese.  Having  first  put  them  in  mind, 
that "  God  is  one,  and  Christ  is  one,  and  the  church  is  one, 
and  the  Episcopal  chair  is  one,"  he  then  points  to  the  appli- 
cation, and  shows  what  ought  to  be  the  consequence  of  all 

*  "  Inde  per  temporum,  et  successionum  vices,  Episcoporiim  ordina- 
tio,  et  ecclesise  ratio  decurrit,  ut  ecclesia  super  Episcopos  constituatur,  et 
omnis  actus  ecclesise  per  eosdem  praepositos  gubernetur.  Cum  hoc  itaque 
divina  lege  fundatum  sit,  miror  quosdam  audaci  temeritate,  sic  miiii  scri- 
bere  voluisse,  ut  ecclesiae  nomine  literas  facerer.t ;  quanda  ecclesia  in  Epis- 
copo,  et  clero,  et  in  omnibus  stantibus  sit  constituta."     Cypr.  Epist.  33. 


S14  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

this  unity,  in  the  most  earnest  and  affectionate  terms. — 
"  Ye  are  brethren,"  says  he,  "  let  no  man  make  you  wander 
from  the  ways  of  the  Lord  :  Ye  are  Christians,  let  no  man 
rend  you  from  the  gospel  of  Christ :  Let  no  man  take  off 
from  the  church,  the  sons  of  the  church :  Let  them  who 
have  a  mind  to  perish,  perish  by  themselves:  Let  them 
alone  continue  out  of  the  church,  who  have  departed  from 
the  church  ;  Let  them  alone  not  be  with  the  bishops,  who 
have  rebelled  against  the  bishops."^ 

But  it  was  not  to  "  his  people,"  or  laity  only,  that  Cyprian 
directed  these,  and  such  like  admonitions,  warning  them  of 
the  danger  of  despising  the  due  exercise  of  ecclesiastical 
authority ;  he  spake  the  same  language  to  his  clergy,  and 
showed  himself  equally  desirous  of  enforcing  on  the  inferior 
orders  of  the  ministry,  a  becoming  regard  to  that  sacred  au- 
thority, when  thus  exercised  in  the  way  of  Christ's  appoint- 
ment. Having  been  informed  of  the  ill  usage,  which  one  of 
his  contemporary  bishops  had  received  from  a  turbulent  and 
disorderly  deacon,  he  recommended  a  proper  exertion  of 
the  Episcopal  authority,  as  the  most  likely  way  of  bringing 
the  delinquent  to  a  just  sense  of  his  duty;  observing  at  the 
same  time,  in  the  letter  which  he  wrote  on  the  occasion,  that 
*'  the  deacons  ought  to  remember,  that  our  Lord  himself 
chose  apostles,  that  is,  bishops  and  governors ;  whereas  the 
apostles,  after  their  Lord's  ascension,  appointed  for  them- 
selves deacons,  to  be  ministers  of  the  church,  and  of  their 
Episcopal  office;  so  that,  if  we  durst  do  any  thing  against 
God,  who  hath  made  us  bishops,  they  might  in  like  manner 
oppose  us,  by  whose  authority  they  have  been  made  dea- 
cons."'!' 

*  "  Deus  unus  est,  et  Christus  unus,  et  una  ecclesia,  et  cathedra  una 
— Nemo,  vos  fratres,  errare  a  Domini  viis  faciat:  Nemo  vos  Christia- 
nos  ab  evangelic  Christ i  rapiat:  Nemo  filios  ecclesiae  de  ecclesia  tollat  : 
Pereant  sibi  soli,  qui  per  Ire  voluerunt.  Extra  ecclesiam  soli  remaneant, 
qui  de  ecclesia  recesserunt.  Soli  cum  Episcopis  non  sint,  qui  contra  Epis- 
copos  rebellarunt."     Cypr.  Epist.  43. 

f  "  Memmisse  autum  Diaconi  debent,  quoniam  apostolos,  id  est  Epis- 
copos  et  prgepositos,   Dominus  elegit ;   diaconos  autem  post  ascensuni 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  21 S 

The  deacons,  however,  were  not  the  only  order  of  church 
officers,  whom  Cyprian  has  described  as  placed  in  a  sub- 
ordinate capacity,  and  acting  under  the  authority  of  the 
bishops.  Even  the  presbyters  also,  though  always  men- 
tioned by  this  venerable  prelate  in  terms  of  the  most  affec- 
tionate regard,  and  whom  he  so  often  calls  his  fellow-pres- 
byters^ and  points  out  their  duty,  as  partners  with  him  in 
the  great  work  of  the  ministry,  are  yet  as  constantly  put  in 
remembrance,  that  nothing  was  to  be  done  by  them,  as 
part  of  that  work,  but  with  the  allowance  and  consent  of 
their  ecclesiastical  superior;  much  less  was  any  thing  to 
be  attempted  in  despite  of  his  just  authority,  and  from  an 
avowed  spirit  of  opposition  to  it.  That  any  such  attempt 
was  considered  in  the  days  of  Cyprian  as  highly  blameable, 
and  worthy  of  censure,  is  evident  from  the  manner  in 
which  he  expressed  himself,  when  obliged  to  restrain  the 
arrogance  of  some  of  his  own  presbyters,  who,  during  his 
absence,  occasioned  by  the  violence  of  persecution,  had 
evinced  a  desire  to  take  the  whole  Episcopal  power  into 
their  own  hands,  and  to  manage  the  affairs  of  the  church, 
as  if  they  had  been  independent  on  any  superior.  Deeply 
sensible  of  the  necessity  of  repressing  such  a  daring  spirit 
of  disobedience,  he  tells  them  very  plainly,  that  he  had  for 
a  long  time  taken  no  notice  of  their  unruly  conduct,  hoping 
by  his  forbearance  to  have  obliged  them  to  be  quiet ;  but 
their  excessive  presumption  would  not  suffer  him  to  be 
silent  any  longer,  lest  the  people  committed  to  his  care 
should  suffer  through  his  inattention.  "  For  what,"  says 
he,  "  have  we  not  to  fear  from  the  displeasure  of  our  Lord, 
when  some  of  our  presbyters,  neither  mindful  of  the  rules 
of  the  gospel,  nor  of  their  own  station  in  the  church,  and 
making  no  account  of  the  authority  of  the  bishop,  who  is 

Domini  in  caelo,  apostoli  sibi  constituerunt  Episcopatus  sui,  et  ecclesiae 
ministros.  Quod  si  nos  aliquid  audere  contra  Deum  possumus,  qui  Epis- 
copos  facit ;  possint  et  contra  nos  audere  diaconi,  a  quibus  fiunt."  Cypr. 
Epist.  3. 


«it 


216  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

at  present  set  over  them,  or  even  of  that  future  day,  which 
shall  bring  every  work  into  judgment,  have  done  what  was 
never  attempted  before,  and,  in  defiance  of  their  superior, 
have  usurped  the  whole  power,  which  he  has  a  right  to  ex- 
ercise ?"*  He  therefore  concludes  his  letter  with  assuring 
them,  that  if  they  still  persist  in  such  factious  and  disor- 
derly practices,  he  will  use  the  authority  which  the  Lord 
had  entrusted  to  him,  and  prohibit  their  future  discharge  of 
any  ministerial  duties. 

In  all  this,  we  cannot  but  discover  abundant  evidence  of 
the  subordination  both  of  deacons  and  presbyters  to  their 
bishop  ;  and  must  be  convinced  by  so  many  undoubted  tes- 
timonies, that  this  was  a  principle  firmly  believed  in  the 
Cyprianic  age,  and  received  as  a  part  of  that  apostolic  doc- 
trine, which  was  to  be  handed  down  in  the  Christian 
church,  to  the  end  of  the  world.  Were  we  to  cite  but  the 
most  striking  passages  from  the  works  of  St.  Cyprian,  which 
serv^e  to  e&tablish  the  belief  of  this  principle,  it  would  be 
only  repeating  what  was  done  in  a  most  distinct  and  judi- 
cious manner,  about  a  century  ago,  by  a  learned  writer  of 
this  country ,t  who,  soon  after  the  publication  of  this  work, 
was  promoted  to  the  Episcopate,  on  the  same  primitive 
footing  as  that  on  which  was  placed  the  authority  of  the 
bishop  of  C.'.rthage.  In  maintaining  that  authority,  we 
have  seen  this  venerable  martyr  standing  forth  as  its  zea- 
lous advocate,  under  the  most  trying  and  difficult  circum- 

*  "  Quid  enim  non  periculum  rnetuere  debemus  de  offensa  Domini, 
quando  aliqui  de  presbyteris,  nee  evangelii,  nee  loci  sui  memores,  sed  ne- 
que  futurum  Domini  judicium,  neque  nunc  sibi  prspositum  Episcopum 
cogitantes,  quod  nunquam  omnino  sub  antecessoribus  factum  est,  cum 
contumelia  et  contempiu  propositi,  totum  sibi  vindicent."  Cypr.  Epist. 
16. 

I  See  the  Principles  of  the  Cvprianic  Age  ivith  regard  to  Episcopal  Paiver 
cr.d  yurisdiction,  cjfc. — and  a  Vindicalion  of  ihat  Discourse,  &c.  both  by 
the  Rev.  John  Sage,  who,  before  the  revolution,  was  one  of  the  minis- 
ters of  Glasgow,  and  in  ITOJ,  v.as  consecrated  a  bishop  of  the  Scotch 
tlunrh, 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy ».  217 

stances,  and  when  his  zeal  in  supporting  the  character 
with  which  he  had  been  invested,  was  the  certain  means  of 
increasing  the  dangers  to  which  he  was  exposed,  and  plac- 
ing him  in  the  ver}^  front  of  the  battle,  to  be  more  direcdy 
aimed  at,  by  the  fary  of  his  enemies.  Yet,  with  all  this 
malice  and  opposition  staring  him  in  the  face,  he  never 
shrunk  from  the  arduous  task,  which  the  dignity  of  his 
office  imposed  upon  him.  Through  evil  report  and  good 
report,  he  persevered  in  a  steady  resolution  to  discharge, 
with  vigour  and  firmness,  the  sacred  trust  committed  to  him ; 
and,  in  every  part  of  his  writings,  we  find  his  theory  and 
practice  uniformly  consistent,  with  respect  to  the  subordi- 
nation which  had  always  distinguished  the  Christian  mi- 
nistr}^  On  this  very  point,  therefore,  it  is  the  more  sur- 
prising that  such  a  man  as  Dr.  Campbell  should  endeavour 
to  represent  him  as  at  variance  with  himself!  a  misrepre^ 
sentation,  for  which  we  cannot  otherwise  account,  than  by 
adopting  the  Doctor's  own  opinion,  that  "  when  once  unhap- 
pily the  controversial  spirit  has  gotten  possession  of  a  man, 
his  object  is  no  longer  truth,  but  victory."  We  are  not 
ashamed,  however,  to  stand  up  for  Cyprian's  self-consis- 
tency, or  to  rank  ourselves  on  his  side  of  the  question  now 
under  our  consideration,  even  although  it  should  be  held 
up  to  ridicule,  under  the  contemptuous,  but  mistaken  epi- 
thet, of  High-church ;  which,  when  our  Professor  thought 
proper  to  apply  as  a  mark  of  scorn,  in  the  case  before  us, 
he  might  have  reflected  that  those  whom  he  wished  to  make 
the  objects  of  this  vulgar  sneer,  look  higher  up  for  their 
apostleship  than  even  to  Cyprian,  great  and  venerable  as 
they  know  him  to  have  been,  and  much  as  they  esteem  the 
support  which  he  has  afforded  to  the  cause  of  ecclesiastical 
unity  and  order.* 

*  It  was  no  doubt  very  pleasing  to  Dr.  Campbell  to  find  his  sarcastic 
account  of  the  venerable  Cyprian,  as  the  "  apostle  of  High-church  "  so 
happily  coinciding  yff\t\\  the  opinion  of  a  w^riter,  whose  work  he  admired 
as  "  a  most  masterly  performance."     In  the  Hiatory  of  rhe  Decline  and 

1^. 


'its  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

Our  I^ecturer,  indeed^  looks  not  so  high  for  support  td 
his  cause  ;  but,  passing  quickly  over  the  authority  of  Cy- 
prian, "  eminent"  as  he  calls  it,  he  hastens  to  produce  again 
that  of  Hilary,  the  Roman  deacon,  with  more  hope,  no 
doubt,  of  finding  a  friend  in  him,  whom  he  had  quoted  be- 
fore with  approbation,  as  "  a  man  of  erudition  and  discern- 
ment."— In  giving  our  opinion  of  the  sentiments  ascribed  to 
this  writer,  we  could  not  but  take  notice  of  the  partial  man- 
ner in  which  his  words  were  extracted  from  his  writings,^© 
give  some  ground  for  the  forced  construction  that  was  to  be 
put  upon  them :  And  the  same  observation  may  be  applied 
to  the  quotation  now  before  us,  wherein  this  commentator  is 
represented  as  inferring  from  a  passage  in  the  third  chapter 
of  the  first  Epistle  to  Timothy,  that  there  is  no  difference 
between  the  ordination  of  a  bishop  and  of  a  presbj^er,  and 
that  "  Timothy  himself  was  ordained  a  presbyter,  but 
because  he  had  not  another  before  him,  was,  therefore,  a 

I'all  of  the  Roman  Empire,  after  being  told,  that  the  ambitious  "  Cyprian 
ruled  with  the  most  absolute  sway  the  church  of  Carthage,  and  the  pro- 
vincial synods,"  we  find  his  conduct  ascribed  to  a  motive  as  unworthy 
of  his  character  as  of  the  author  who  could  thus  argue — "  Cyprian  had 
renounced  those  temporal  honours,  which,  it  is  probable,  he  would  never 
have  obtained  ;  but  the  acquisition  of  such  absolute  command  over  the 
consciences  and  understanding  of  a  congregation,  however  obscure  or 
despised  by  the  world,  is  more  truly  grateful  to  the  pnde  of  the  human 
heart,  than  the  possession  of  the  most  despotic  power,  nnposed  by  arms 
and  conquest  on  a  reluctant  people."  After  such  an  account  of  his  con- 
duct in  life,  we  need  not  be  surprised  at  the  following  base  insinuation 
•with  respect  to  his  feelings  under  the  prospect  of  a  violent  death—"  It 
was  in  the  choice  of  Cyprian  either  to  die  a  martyr,  or  to  live  an  apos- 
tate :  but  on  that  choice  depended  the  alternative  of  honour  or  infamy. 
Could  we  suppose  that  the  bishop  of  Carthage  had  employed  the  profes- 
sion of  the  Christian  faith  only  as  the  instrument  of  his  avarice  or  ambi- 
tion, it  was  still  incumbent  on  him  to  support  the  character  which  he 
had  assumed;  and  if  he  possessed  the  smallest  degree  of  manly  fortitude, 
rather  to  expose  himself  to  the  most  cruel  tortures,  than  by  a  singiC  act 
to  exchange  the  reputation  of  a  whole  life,  for  the  abliorrence  of  his 
Christian  brethren,  and  the  contempt  of  the  Gentile  world."  See  Gib- 
bon's History ^  {jJ'c.  8vo.  edit.  vol.  ii.  p.  352, 435. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  2t^ 

bishop."  On  this  our  Professor  observes—"  Nothing  can 
be  more  evident,  than  that  the  whole  distinction  of  the 
Episcopate  is  here  ascribed  to  seniority  in  the  ministry, 
without  either  election,  or  special  ordination.  When  the 
bishop  died,  the  senior  colleague  succeeded  of  course ;  as 
to  ordination,  it  was  the  same  in  both,  and  bishop  meant 
no  more,  than  first  among  the  presbyters,  or  the  senior 
presbyter."^  But  if  this  be  really  the  meaning  of  Hilary's 
words,  we  must  be  allowed  to  say,  that  he  expressed  him- 
self very  improperly,  when  in  the  same  passage  he  assigned 
this  as  the  reason,  why  there  was  "  one  ordination  of  a  bi- 
shop and  a  presbyter ;  because  they  were  both  priests"— 
and  there  could  be  no  necessity  for  a  double  appointment 
to  the  same  office,  as  it  was  undoubtedly  by  the  same  ordi- 
nation, that  both  bishop  and  presbyter  were  promoted  to 
the  order  of  priesthood.-"-"  But,"  as  he  immediately  adds 
— *'  the  bishop  is  the  first  or  chief  priest ;"  the  first,  not 
merely  in  point  of  seniority,  but  in  order  and  authority, 
such  as  the  chief  priest  was  in  the  Jewish  church.  For 
though  he  was  a  priest,  yet  all  of  that  order  were  not  high- 
priests,  nor  did  they  succeed  to  that  office  in  the  way  of 
seniority ;  just  so-»»-says  Hilary,  "  though  every  bishop  be 
'  a  presbyter,  yet  eveiy  presbyter  is  not  a  bishop  ;"t  O^S  ^s 
our  Professor  might  have  said  to  his  pupils, — "  though 
every  moderator  be  a  minister,  yet  every  minister  is  not  a 
moderator,"  nor  does  he  "  succeed  to  the  office  of  course, 
as  senior  colleague ;"  for  if  we  are  not  mistaken,  the  choice 
generally  falls  on  the  junior  colleagues  ;  a  very  wide  depar- 
ture indeed  from  what  Dr.  Campbell  makes  Hilary  describe 

*  Lecture  vii. 

t  The  whole  passage  from  Hilary,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell,  is  u\ 
these  words :  "  Post  Episcopum  tamen  diaconi  ordinationem  subjecit. 
Quare  ?  Nisi  quia  Episcopi  et  presbyteri  una  ordinatio  est  ?  uternue  enim 
sacerdos  est.  Sed  Episcopus  primus  est,  ut  omnis  Episcopus  presbyter 
sit,  non  omnis  presbyter  Episcopus.  Hie  enim  Episcopus  est  qui  inter 
presbyleros  primus  est.  Denique  Timotheum  presbyterum  ordinatum 
significat,  sed  quia  ante  se  alteram  non  habebat,  Episcopus  erat." 


g20'  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

to  have  been  the  primitive  practice,  and  to  give  weight  to 
his  authority,  points  him  out  as  "  a  respectable  member  of 
the  Roman  presbytery  in  those  days."  How  far  he  was 
thought  to  deserve  that  character,  and  what  respect  was 
paid  to  his  authority  by  some  of  the  other  writers  of  "  those 
days,"  may  be  easily  discovered  from  the  ridiculous  and  con- 
temptible light  in  which  he  is  represented  by  the  very  next 
"  witness  whom  our  Lecturer  adduces,  a  man,"  he  says, 
^'  who  had  more  erudition  than  any  person  then  in  the 
church,  the  greatest  linguist,  the  greatest  critic,  the  greatest 
antiquary  of  them  all." 

This  is  no  other  than  the  presbyter  Jerome,  who  wrote 
about  the  end  of  the  fourth,  and  beginning  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, and  whose  "  eminent  authority"  re^  uires  particular 
consideration,  "  because,"  according  to  Dr.  Campbell's 
distinction,  "  he  is  held  the  great  apostle  of  low-church.''* 
So  much  indeed  is  his  authority  built  upon,  in  support  of 
ecclesiastical  parity,  that  the  most  powerful  champion  who 
has  ever  yet  stood  forth  in  its  defence,  after  composing  a 
voluminous  work  against  the  Episcopal  government  of  the 
church,  sent  it  abroad  into  the  world  under  the  title  of— 
"  An  Apology  for  the  opinion  of  Jerome."*  As  it  is  from 
this  armory  that  all  the  subsequent  adversaries  of  Episco- 
pacy have  borrowed  the  principal  weapons,  with  which  they 
have  appeared  in  the  field,  and  fitted  themselves  for  the 
combatj  we  may  well  suppose,  that  our  learned  opponent 


*  See  D,  Blondel's  "  Apologia  pro  sentcntia  Ifieronymi."  Amstel. 
1646,  as  to  which  Dr.  Monro,  in  his  Enquiry  into  the  Nev:  Opinions,  kSfc. 
very  justly  observes,  that — "  when  the  government  and  revenues  of  the 
church  were  sacrilegiously  invaded  by  atheists  and  enthusiasts  under 
Oliver  Cromwell,  the  learned  Blondel  employed  all  his  skill  to  make  the 
ancients  contradict  themselves,  and  all  contemporary  records,-  and  though 
every  line  that  he  had  written,  with  the  least  colour  of  argument,  had 
been  frequently  answered  and  exposed,  it  was  still  thought  enough  for 
the  enemies  of  Episcopacy  to  say  that  Blondel  had  written  a  book  of 
549  pages,  to  show  that  Jerome  was  of  their  opinion,  and  had  sufficiently 
proved  that  this  ancient  Monk  was  a  PresbyteriarJ' 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  221 

in  this  place,  would  not  fail  to  wield  these  weapons  with 
his  wonted  dexterity ;  and  so  as  to  make  them  \'ield  every 
possible  aid  to  the  cause  which  he  had  undertaken  to  de- 
fend, while  thus  employed  in  fighting  his  way  through 
what  he  calls  "  the  progress  of  the  hierarchy."  With  this 
view,  we  now  find  him  bringing  forward,  in  what  he,  no 
doubt,  thought  the  most  hostile  form,  "  the  testimony"  of 
Jerome,  as  attacking  Episcopacy  from  one  particular  point, 
"  the  practice,  which,"  he  says,  "  had  long^  subsisted  at 
Alexandria ;"  and  then  gives  us  the  passage  in  Jerome's  own 
words,  from  his  epistle  to  Evagrius,  mentioning  that  "  from 
the  days  of  St.  Mark,  the  evangelist,  down  to  those  of  the 
bishops  Heracla  and  Dionysius,  the  presbyters  of  Alexan- 
dria always  chose  one  from  among  themselves,  and  placing 
him  in  a  higher  seat,  named  him  bishop,  as  an  army  would 
make  an  emperor,  or  deacons  choose  an  arch-deacon."* 

This  is  the  famous  story,  respecting  the  supposed  custom 
of  the  church  of  Alexandria,  which,  from  the  davs  of 
'Blondel,  has  been  eagerly  laid  hold  of,  to  show,  what  Dr. 
Campbell  calls — "  the  sense  and  strength  of  the  argument" 
arising  from  it,  that  there  can  be  no  essential  diiference" 
between  the  order  of  bishop  and  that  of  presbyter ;  since, 
to  make  a  bishop,  nothing  more  was  necessary  at  first  (and 
of  this  practice  the  church  of  Alexandria  remained  long  an 
example,)  than  the  nomination  of  his  fellow  presbyters ;  and 
no  ceremony  of  consecration  was  required,  but  what  was 
performed  by  them,  and  consisted  chiefly  in  placing  him  in 
a  higher  seat,  and  saluting  him  bishop."!  We  know  well 
where  it  is,  that  every  thing  which  looks  like  ceremony  in 
the  holy  offices  of  religion,  has  been  long  exploded  j  but  we 

*  "  Alexandria  a  Marco  evangelista  usque  ad  Heraclam  et  Dionysiuni 
Episcopos,  presbyteri  semper  unum  ex  so  electum,  in  excelsiori  gradu 
coUocatum,  Episcopum  nominabant,  quomodo  si  exercitus  imperatorem 
faciat,  aut  diaconi  eligant  de  se  quern  industrium  noverint,  et  archidiaco- 
hurh  vocent."     Hieron.  Ep.  ad  Evagrium. 

t  Lecture  vii. 


222  General  Defeftce  of  Episcopacy* 

cannot  so  readily  discover,  by  what  means  the  sacred  rite  of 
ordination  can  be  excluded  from  the  account  given  by  Je- 
rome of  the  practice  at  Alexandria,  when  the  words  imme- 
diately following  the  passage  just  now  quoted,  so  directly 
refer  to  that  very  rite,  and  are  introduced  with  the  same 
connecting  particle,  on  which  our  Professor  appears  to  lay 
some  stress — ^''  For*'*  even  at  Alexandria, — "what  does  a 
bishop,  which  a  presbyter  may  not  do,  excepting  ordina' 
tion  .^"^ — "  True,"  says  he,  "  Jerome  admits  this  as  a  dis- 
tinction that  then  actually  obtained ;  but  the  whole  preced- 
ing part  of  his  letter  was  written  to  evince,  that  from  the 
beginning  it  was  not  so,"  And  we  may  say,  it  is  equally 
true,  that  between  "  writing  to  evince,"  and  "  actual  evinc- 
ing," there  is  a  very  material  difference,  as  frequently  ap- 
pears from  the  latter  being  by  no  means  the  consequence  of 
the  former. 

As  a  proof  of  this,  let  us  only  try  how  Dr.  Campbell's 
paraphrase  of  the  words  he  had  quoted  from  Jerome,  will 
bear  its  necessary  connection  with  the  perplexing  question 
which  immediately  follows  them. — *'  There  was  nothing," 
says  the  Doctor,  "  at  first  requisite  to  make  a  bishop,  but 
what  was  performed  by  his  fellow  presbyters,  no  other  ordi- 
nation, than  their  election  ;yor,"  adds  Jerome,-—"  what  does 
^  bishop  which  a  presbyter  may  not  do,  excepting  ordina- 
tion P"  But  why  except  ordination,  or  deny  the  power  of 
it  to  the  presbyters,  if  no  such  thing  was  necessary,  or  ever 
required  in  the  making  of  a  bishop?  It  is  evident,  therefore, 
that  Jerome  not  only  "  admits  the  superiority  of  bishops  in 
the  exclusive  privilege  of  ordaining,"  which  Dr.  Campbell 
acknowledges  to  be  "  true,"  but  that  he  also  admits  it  to 
have  been  so  from  the  beginning,  at  least  from  the  time 
when  those  divisions  broke  out  in  the  church  of  Corinth^ 
to  which  St.  Paul  refers  in  his  first  Epistle  to  the  Corin*. 


•  Quid  enim  facit,  excepta  ordinationCf  EpiscopuSi  quod  presbyter  non 

faciat  I 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  223 

Ihians.  For  it  was  immediately  after  these  divisions  took 
place,  and  in  the  very  time  of  the  apostles,  that  provision 
was  made  for  what  Jerome  calls  the  "  remedy  of  schism," 
and  to  which  he  alludes  more  particularly  in  his  commentary 
on  the  Episde  to  Titus,  in  which  we  find  this  account  given 
of  the  same  matter,  that  when  it  began  to  be  said,  I  am  of 
Paul,  and  I  of  ApoUos,  and  I  of  Cephas,  and  ''  every  one 
thought  that  those  whom  he  baptized  belonged  to  himself, 
and  not  to  Christ,  it  was  decreed  through  the  whole  world, 
that  one,  chosen  from  among  the  presbyters,  should  be  set 
over  the  rest,  to  whom  should  belong  the  whole  care  of  the 
church,  that  so  the  seeds  of  schism  might  be  taken  away."'^ 
Allowing  now,  that  such  a  decree  did  really  take  place,  on 
the  occasion  which  is  here  said  to  have  given  rise  to  it,  we 
must  still  find  it  necessary  to  inquire,  by  whom  it  was 
made,  and  what  authority  there  was  for  making  it.  It 
could  not  be  the  consequence  of  any  voluntary  agreement 
among  the  presbyters  themselves,  who  were  the  persons 
whose  power,  it  seems,  had  been  abused,  and  was,  there- 
fore, to  be  now  restrained  :  For  such  an  agreement  could 
only  have  produced  a  disposition  to  submit  to  this  restraint, 
but  could  not  imply  that  they  had  any  competent  authority 
to  impose  it.  No  general  council  had  yet  been  called,  no 
'assembly  of  the  church  held,  which  could  pretend  to  give 
laws  to  all  its  members,  or  to  issue  any  other  decrees  than 
what  had  come  from  those  who  had  received  power  from 
on  high — to  "  go  and  teach  all  nations."  It  was  to  the 
apostles^  therefore,  and  to  them  only,  that  we  can  ascribe 
the  decree  to  which  Jerome  refers,  if  any  such  was  made 
for  binding  the  whole  Christian  world ;  so  that  even  on  the 
principle  which  he  lays  down.  Episcopacy  can  be  traced  to 
no  other  source  than  apostolic  institution. 

*  '*  Postquam  vero  unusquisque,  eos  quos  baptizaverat  suosputavitesse, 
non  Christ),  in  toto  orbe  decretmn  est,  ut  unus  de  presbyreris  electis  supex- 
poneretur  caeteris,  ad  quern  omnis  ecclesiae  cura  pcrtinerer,  et  schisma- 
tiim  semina  toUerentar." 


224  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

If  after  what  has  now  been  said  of  Jerome's  testimony^ 
It  should  still  be  pretended,  that  his  Alexandrian  custom 
militates  against  any  such  original  distinction  been  bishop 
and  presbyter,  as  we  have  all  along  asserted,  we  shall  find 
a  sufficient  reply  to  this  objection  in  Jerome's  own  words, 
used  against  one  of  his  antagonists  on  a  similar  occasion, 
"  Quid  mihi  profers  unius  urbis  consuetudinem  ?"  Why 
do  you  twit  me  with  the  custom  of  one  city  ?  Or,  as  he 
expresses  the  same  sentiment  in  another  place  by  an  antithe- 
sis, which  suffers  from  being  translated  into  English—- 
"  Major  est  (auctoritas)  or  bis  quam  urbis.^'^  The  example 
of  a  world  is  of  more  authority  than  that  of  a  city.  But 
indeed  there  are  many  arguments  which  might  be  adduced 
to  show,  that  even  the  practice  of  the  church  in  the  city  of 
Alexandria  was  not  such  as  Jerome  appears,  or  rather  as 
his  commentators  would  make  him  appear  to  represent  it. 
There  were  two  writers  considerably  earlier  than  he,  and 
both  of  them  members  of  this  same  presbytery  of  Alex- 
andria, which  is  pretended  to  have  had  such  extraordi- 
nary powers  in  the  nomination  or  appointment  of  their 
bishop ;  and  yet  no  notice  is  taken  by  them,  not  the  least 
hint  given  either  by  Clemens  or  Origen,  of  any  such  pecu- 
'  liar  practice  or  privilege  in  the  church  to  which  the}'  be- 
longed. This  is  the  more  remarkable  in  the  case  of  Ori- 
gen, who  frequently  complained  of  the  severity  with  which 
he  had  been  treated  by  his  bishop  Demetrius,  but  never 
thought  of  reminding  him  of  the  equality  of  footing  on 
which  they  stood,  or  of  claiming  the  rights  of  a  fellow 
presbyter ;  which  surely  he  might  have  done,  had  Deme- 
trius been  no  more  than  a  temporary  moderator,  placed  in 
the  chair  with  no  other  ceremony  than  that  of  salutation, 
and  for  no  other  purpose,  than  collecting  the  votes  of  his 
brethren,  and  preserving  order  in  their  several  meetings. 

We  are  not  disposed  to  call  in  question  the  testimony  of 
Jerome,  whose  character  and  abilities  we  hold  in  just  vene- 
ration ;  and  had  he  personally  witnessed,  or  been  contem- 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  225 

porary  with  those  who  witnessed,  the  singular  custom 
which  he  assigns  to  the  church  in  Alexandria,  we  should 
have  paid  all  due  respect  to  '*  his  testimony,  as  a  testimony 
in  relation  to  a  matter  of  fact,  both  recent  and  notorious  */' 
But  we  are  surprised  that  a  writer,  so  much  applauded  for 
accuracy  as  Dr.  Campbell,  should  have  distinguished  Je^ 
rome's  testimony  in  this  manner ,  or  held  it  out  as  "  regard' 
ing  the  then  late  uniform  practice  of  the  church  of  Alex* 
andria;"  as  it  appears,  even  by  his  own  calculation,  that 
from  the  time  when  the  practice  ceased,  to  the  time  when 
Jerome  gave  this  account  of  it,  there  must  have  elapsed 
near  an  hundred  and  forty  years ;  a  much  longer  period 
■than  seems  to  be  intimated  by  the  manner  in  which  our 
Professor  speaks  of  it :  and  it  may  well  be  questioned 
whether  a  transaction  at  such  a  distance  of  time,  however 
notorious,  could  properly  be  termed  recent^  or  whether,  in 
referring  to  the  happy  event  of  1660,  an  accurate  writer 
would,  in  1800,  call  it  the  late  restoration. 

But  we  are  told,  that  in  support  of  Jerome's  testimony, 
"  that  of  the  Alexandrian  patriarch  Eutychius  has  been 
pleaded,  who,  in  his  annals  of  that  church,  takes  notice  of 
the  same  practice,  but  with  greater  particularity  of  circum- 
stances  than  had  been  done  by  Jerome."  And  our  Le,Cr 
turer  might  also  have  told  his  pupils,  that  this  same  annalist 
lived  as  far  down  as  the  tenth  century,  and  though  a 
patriarch,  such  as  the  church  produced  at  that  day,  was 
remarkable  for  nothing  so  much  as  his  credulity,  and  the 
inconsistency  of  his  narratives,  not  only  with  those  of  more 
authentic  historians,  but  often  with  themselves.  Neither 
Jerome  nor  he  produces  any  authorities  for  what  they 
report  of  the  practice  at  Alexandria ;  and  as  to  the  former, 
it  is  well  known,  that  being  a  man  of  warm  temper,  hot  in 
disputation,  and  possessed  of  extensive  learning,  and  won- 
derful powers  of  mind,  he  would  readily  take  hold  of  any 
appearance  of  argument,  and  push  it  in  every  direction,  by 
his  peculiar  strength  of  language,  to  carry  the  point  which 

39 


226  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

he  had  in  view,  and  was  eager  to  accomplish.  That  this 
was  the  case  when  he  wrote  his  epistle  to  Evagrius,  is  in 
some  measure  acknowledged  by  our  Professor  himself,  who 
says — that  what  Jerome  had  been  maintaining  in  the  pre- 
ceding part  of  this  letter,  was  "  in  opposition  to  some  dea- 
con, who  had  foolishly  boasted  of  the  order  of  deacons,  as 
being  superior  to  the  order  of  presbyters."  Feeling,  there- 
fore, for  the  dignity  of  his  own  office,  thus  in  danger  of 
being  trampled  on  by  such  presumptuous  folly^  Jerome's 
object  was,  by  every  possible  means,  to  exalt  the  presbytery 
in  order  to  repress  the  aspiring  pretensions  of  the  deacon. 
With  this  view,  a  man  of  such  keen  resentment,  and 
warmth  of  disposition,  would  naturally  push  his  argument 
beyond  its  proper  bearing,  and  in  his  haste  to  keep  down 
the  presumption  of  an  inferior  order,  would  easily  run  on, 
till  he  encroached  on  that  which  was  superior  to  his  own  ; 
that  so  by  adding  to  the  height  on  which  he  stood,  he  might 
increase  his  distance  from  those  that  were  below  him* 
Those  who  coolly  attend  to  his  train  of  reasoning  on  the 
subject  before  us,  can  hardly  fail  to  discover  that  this  is 
often  the  case ;  and,  on  many  occasions,  will  find  it  more 
difficult  to  reconcile  Jerome  to  himself,  than  to  draw  any 
advantage  from  him,  in  favour  of  that  cause,  which  the 
followers  of  his  apologist,  Blondel,  have  so  anxiously 
brought  him  forward  to  support* 

It  has  been  justly  observed,  that  "  in  spite  of  the  appa- 
rent contradictions  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  Jerome, 
some  of  the  strongest  proofs  may  be  produced  from  them, 
that  the  original  establishment  of  the  Christian  church  was 
Episcopal^'*  in  the  true  and  proper  sense  of  that  term.* 
In  this  same  epistle  to  Evagrius,  he  says  expressly— 
'^  That  we  may  know  that  the  apostolic  traditions  were 
taken  from  the  Old  Testament,  that  which  Aaron  and  his 
sons,  and  the  Levites  were  in  the  temple,  let  the  bishops, 

*  See  an  Appendix  to  Mr.  Daubeny's  Guide  to  the  Church,  vol.  i.  p.  66. 


i"^.. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy •  227 

presbyters  and  deacons  clainj  to  themselves  in  the  church."* 
Here  it  is  plainly  asserted,  not  only  that  the  hierarchy  of 
the  church  is  founded  on  apostolic  tradition,  but  also  that 
the  apostles  had  the  model  of  the  temple  in  their  view,  and 
raised  their  plan  of  church  government  according  to  the 
Jewish  economy,  by  placing  the  same  difference  between 
bishop,  presbyter  and  deacon,  under  the  gospel,  as  there 
had  been  between  the  high-priest,  priest  and  Levite  under 
the  law  ;  a  position,  which  overturns  every  argument  that 
can  be  brought  from  any  other  part  of  his  writings,  to 
prove  the  identity  of  bishop  and  presbyter,  or  that  the 
latter  is  of  the  same  order  with  the  former ;  of  whom  he 
says  also  in  this  epistle—^"  that  the  power  of  riches,  or  the 
humility  of  pov'erty,  does  not  make  a  bishop  higher  or 
lower ;  but  they  are  all  successors  of  the  apostles."f  On 
the  same  principle  he  argues  against  the  Luciferians  in  the 
following  manner — "  that  the  safety  of  the  church  depends 
on  the  dignity  of  the  chief  priest,  (or  bishop)  to  whom,  if 
a  peculiar  power  be  not  given,  superior  to  that  of  others, 
there  will  be  as  many  schisms  as  priests  in  the  churches."J 
To  the  same  purpose  we  find  him  admonishing  Nepotian 
*'  to  be  subject  to  his  chief  priest,  and  to  receive  him  as 
the  father  of  his  soul;  for  what  Aaron  and  his  sons  were, 
that  we  know  the  bishop  and  presbyters  to  be."||  It  may 
also  be  observed,  that  in  his  Catalogue  of  ecclesiastical  wri- 

*  "  Et  ut  sciamus  traditioncs  apostolicas  sumptas  de  veteri  testamento; 
quod  Aaron,  et  filii  ejus,  et  LevitDe,  in  templo  fuerint,  hoc  sibi  Episcopi, 
presbyteri  atque  diaconi  vendicent  in  ecclesia."     Epist.  ad  Evag. 

f  "  Potentia  divitiarum,  et  paupertatis  humilitas,  val  sublimiorem  vel 
inferiorem  Episcopum  non  facit.  Ceterum  omnes  apostolorurn  succes- 
sores  sunt."     Epis.  ad  Evag. 

\  *  Ecclesiae  salus  in  summi  sacerdotis  dignitate  pendet,  cui  sj  non 
€Xors  quaedam,  et  ab  omnibus  eminens  detur  potestas,  tot  in  ecclesiis 
efficientur  schismata  quot  sacerdotes."     Dialog,  advers.  Luciferian. 

II  '♦  Esto  subjectus  pontitici  tuo,  et  quast  animze  parentem  suscipe: 
Quod  Aaron  et  rilios  ejus,  hos  Episcopum  et  presbyteros  esse  noveri- 
mas."    Epist.  ad  Nepot. 


22S  Generat  Defence  of  Mpmopdciji 

ters^  he  mentions  "  St.  James  the  Just,  called  the  brother 
of  our  Lord,  as  ordained  by  the  apostles  bishop  of  Jerusa* 
lem,  Timothy  as  ordained  bishop  of  Ephesus  by  St.  Paul^ 
and  Polycarp  bishop  of  Smyrna,  by  St.  John :"  And  in  the 
same  work  he  cites  the  genuine  epistles  of  Ignatius,  as  the 
third  bishop  of  Antioch  after  the  apostle  Peter,  in  which 
epistles  we  know  how  clearly  the  distinction  between  bishop 
and  presbyter  is  marked,  and  the  authority  of  the  superior 
Order  as  firmly  maintained.  To  all  this  may  be  added  what 
he  says,  in  his  epistle  against  the  Montanists,  that  whereas 
*'  among  them  the  bishop  was  considered  as  but  in  the 
third  degree,  among  us  the  bishops  hold  the  place  of  the 
apostles."* 

We  have  now  taken  a  concise,  but  we  believe  correct 
enough  view,  both  of  the  "  testimony  and  opinion"  of  Je- 
rome, in  regard  to  the  point  in  question  between  the  advo- 
cates for  and  against  Episcopacy.  We  have  seen  him  ad- 
mitting, in  his  own  way,  that  the  church  of  Alexandria 
had  this  form  of  ecclesiastical  polity  in  it,  from  the  days  of 
St.  Mark  the  Evangelist,  and  that  it  was  adopted  as  a 
remedy  for  those  schisms  and  confusions,  which  broke  out 
in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  and  was  no  longer  delayed  than 
the  disease  appeared.  We  have  seen  him  also  acknowledg- 
ing, that  the  hierarchy  of  the  Christian  church  was  founded 
on  apostolic  tradition,  and  that  in  establishing  the  evangeli- 
cal polity,  the  apostles  had  an  eye  to  the  legal  economy,  and 
considered  the  peace  and  unity  of  the  church  as  depending 
on  the  authority  of  the  bishops,  whom  he  therefore  repre- 
sents as  standing  in  the  place  of  the  apostles,  and  succeed- 
ing to  all  their  ordinary  powers*  If  these  are  the  senti- 
ments, which  Jerome  delivers  in  plain  unequivocal  lan- 
guage, when  allowed  to  speak  for  himself,  and  without  suf- 
fering any  "  violence  to  his  expressions,"  the  friends  of 
Episcopacy  need  not  be  afraid  of  meeting  with  any  opposi- 

*  "  Apud  eosEpiscopus  tertius  est,  apudnos  apostolorum  locum  Epis- 
copi  tenent."    Ep.  54. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  ^2^ 

lion  either  from  his  "  opinion  or  his  testimony ;"  since  both 
are  equally  favourable  to  their  cause,  when  not  wrested  to 
a  sense,  which  would  make  him  as  inconsistent  with  him- 
self as  hostile  to  them. 

If  after  all  it  should  be  thought,  that  Jerome's  language, 
in  some  parts  of  his  works,  is  of  a  doubtful  nature,  and 
seems  to  give  an  account  of  the  origin  of  Episcopal 
government,  somewhat  different  from  that  which  has  the 
concurring  testimony  of  antiquity  in  its  favour,  we  may 
still  be  allowed  to  ask,  whether  such  writers  as  Clemens  of 
Rome,  Justin  Martyr,  Ignatius,  Polycarp,  Clemens  of 
Alexandria,  Irenaeus,  TertuUian,  Origen,  Cyprian,  and 
many  more,  long  prior  to  Jerome,  were  not  as  capable, 
and  had  not  as  good  opportunities,  as  he,  with  all  his  know- 
ledge of  antiquity,  could  pretend  to,  of  "  investigating  the 
origin  of  any  ecclesiastical  order  or  custom,"  and,  therefore, 
of  discovering  what  change,  or  whether  any  change  had 
happened  in  the  constitution  of  the  church,  from  its  first 
foundation  to  their  own  times  ?  If  such  a  question  must 
be  answered  in  the  affirmative,  we  are  equally  certain,  that 
they  will  all  be  found  to  agree  in  this,  as  a  well  known  truth, 
that  the  ecclesiastical  constitution,  under  which  they  lived, 
consisting  of  three  distinct  orders  of  church  officers,  with 
''  discriminating  powers,  had  been  framed  by  the  apostles, 
after  the  pattern  set  them  by  their  blessed  Master,  and  from 
them  handed  down,  without  change  or  interruption,  by  a 
regular  and  duly  authorized  succession. 

We  have  observed,  from  the  works  of  some  of  these  early 
writers,  how  they  were  accustomed  to  argue  against  the  he- 
retics of  those  times,  from  the  impossibility  of  their  showing 
that  regular  succession  of  bishops  from  the  apostles,  which 
distinguished  all  the  sound  and  orthodox  parts  of  the  Chris- 
tian church.  But  how  weak  and  silly  had  this  argument 
been,  if  the  heretics  could  at  any  time  have  proved  a  breach 
in  that  succession ;  much  more  could  they  have  shown,  by 
undoubted  evidence,  that  it  had  no  relation  to  the  apostles, 


m 


239  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

and  did  not  at  all  commence  till  about  thirty  or  forty  yeais 
after  the  last  of  them  was  removed  from  this  world  ?  Had 
this  been  a  fact,  known,  or  even  but  surmised  at  that  time, 
we  may  well  suppose,  how  eagerly  it  would  have  been  laid 
hold  of,  by  the  enemies  of  the  true  faith,  to  cut  down  at 
once  the  whole  force  of  that  reasoning,  which,  founded 
on  the  apostolic  succession  of  bishops,  had  been  so  repeat- 
edly and  powerfully  employed  against  them. 

The  strength  of  this  argument  did  not  depend  on  any  in- 
genious subtilty  in  the  manner  of  stating  it. — There  was 
nothing  connected  with  it,  which  could  be  considered  as 
matter  of  abstruse  speculation,  that  might  be  differently  un- 
derstood by  the  opposite  parties.     The  whole  point  in  ques- 
tion was  to  be  decided  by  an  appeal  to  those  ecclesiastical 
records,  from  which  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  several 
churches  might  be  easily  ascertained ;  and  no  mistake  was 
likely  to  happen,  none  indeed  could  generally  prevail,  when 
the  public  registers  were  so  numerous,  and  so  many  monu- 
ments remained  to  bear  witness  to  every  important  transac- 
tion, from  the  days  of  the  apostles  down  to  that  very  period, 
which  some   authors  in  these  latter  times  have  thought 
'  proper  to  fix,  as  the  sera  of  a  wonderful  change  in  the  con- 
stitution and  government  of  the  Christian  church.— They 
have  not  indeed  agreed  as  to  the  precise  time  when  this 
supposed  alteration  took  place ;  but  in  general  their  opi- 
nions seem  to  coincide  pretty  much  with  that  of  Dr.  Camp- 
bell, who  acknowledges,  that  "  before  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  a  subordination  in  the  ecclesiastic  polity, 
which  he  calls  primitive  Episcopacy,  began  to  obtain  veiy 
generally  throughout   the   Christian   world,   every  single 
church  or  congregation  having  a  plurality  of  presbyters,  who, 
as  well  as  the  deacons,  were  all  under  the  super  intendency  of 
one  pastor  or  bishop."^    Now,  here  is  an  acknowledgment 


*  "  V  was  under  these  circumstances,"  says  Mr.  Gibbon,  the  historian, 
that  tiU  Ic'tv  title  of  bishop  began  to  raise  itself  above  the  humble 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  25 1 

that  this  extraordinary  change  in  the  ecclesiastic  polity, 
which  consisted  in  the  subordination  of  many,  and  the  su- 
perintendency  of  one,  had  its  beginning'  before  the  middle 
of  the  second  century,  that  is,  about  forty  or  fifty  years  af- 
ter the  death  of  St.  John.  At  this  period,  being  the  close 
of  the  apostolic  age,  it  is  supposed  that  the  ecclesiastic 
polity  was  a  state  of  perfect  parity,  every  church  or  congre- 
gation being  under  the  direction  of  a  college  of  bishops  or 
presbyters,  the  same  name  being  applied  to  all,  with  some 
little  distinction  in  the  senior  colleague,  which  though  not 
easily  defined,  and,  by  our  Professor's  account,  "  very  dif- 
ferent from  that  which  in  process  of  time  obtained,"  yet, 
he  says,  "  served  for  a  foundation  to  the  edifice,  that  is,  to 
the  rise  of  Episcopal  superiority." 

But  even  with  the  advantage  of  this  foundation,  we  shall 
find  it  very  difficult  to  account  for  the  edifice  which  was  so 
quickly  reared,  and  at  a  time  when  so  few  materials  could 
be  furnished  for  that  purpose,  either  by  avarice  or  ambi- 
tion. Our  Lecturer  indeed  thinks  it  "  no  reflection  on  the 
church  in  general,  or  even  on  the  pastors  in  particular,  to 
suppose,  that  however  sincere  their  zeal  for  the  cause  of 

appellation  of  presbyter ;  and  while  the  latter  remained  the  most  natural 
distinction  for  the  members  of  every  Christian  senate,  the  former  was 
appropriated  to  the  dignity  of  its  new  president. — The  primitive  bishops 
were  considered  only  as  the  first  of  their  equals,  and  the  honourable  ser- 
vants of  a  free  people.  Whenever  the  Episcopal  chair  became  vacant  by 
death,  a  new  president  was  cliosen  among  the  presbyters  by  the  surlrage 
of  the  whole  congregation,  every  member  of  which  supposed  himself  in- 
vested with  a  sacred  and  sacerdotal  character.  Such  w  as  the  mild  and 
equal  constitution  by  which  the  Christians  were  governed  more  than  an 
hundred  years  after  the  death  of  the  apostles  Every  society  formed 
within  itself  a  separate  and  independent  republic  " — See  a  great  deal 
more  to  the  same  jjurpose,  from  p.  328  to  p  341  of  the  2d.  vol.  8vo.  of 
the  History  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire;  from  which 
an  attentive  reader  cannot  fail  to  observe  how  closely  our  Christian  Pro- 
fessor has  imitated  the  sceptical  historian.  An  injidel  might  have  had 
reasons  for  slandermg  and  abubi ng  Episcopacy,  of  which  a  believer  should 
have  been  ashamed  to  avail  hintselt 


232  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy > 

Christ  might  be,  as  it  undoubtedly  was  with  a  very  great  ma- 
jority, they  would  not  be  entirely  superior  to  considerations 
either  of  interest  or  of  ambition,  when  such  considerations 
were  not  opposed  by  motives  of  a  higher  nature."^"  And 
we  mav  ask,  what  higher  motives  could  have  been  set  in 
opposition  to  these  worldly  considerations,  than  those  which 
must  have  daily  presented  themselves  to  the  minds  of  the 
primitive  pastors  in  the  age  to  which  we  are  now  looking 
back,  when  many  of  them  must  have  been  ordained  by  the 
apostles  themselves,  or  bj'  their  immediate  successors,  and 
all  of  them  may  be  supposed  to  have  possessed  a  consider- 
able share  of  the  apostolic  spirit  and  disposition,  and  were  at 
any  rate  exposed  to  the  same  hardships  and  sufferings,  the 
same  deprivation  of  all  worldly  comforts  and  conveniences, 
which  the  aposdes  had  to  encounter?  Is  it  then  to  be  ima- 
gined, that  they  would  pretend  to  alter  that  form  of  mi- 
nistr}^  which  the  apostles  had  established  in  the  church,  or 
depart  so  soon  from  the  rule,  which,  by  the  direction  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  had  been  given  them  to  walk  by  ?  Can  it 
be  credited,  that  men  so  humble,  and  heavenly  minded, 
so  meek  and  unassuming  as  these  primitive  pastors  unde- 
"  niably  were,  could  dare  to  bring  forward  a  system  of  ec- 
clesiastic polity  in  direct  opposition  to  that,  which,  by 
Christ's  command,  his  apostles  had  delivered  to  the  con- 
verted nations,  and  thus  prefer  a  little  temporary  pre-emi- 
nence among  their  fellow  servants  on  earth,  to  the  eternal 
approbation  of  their  great  Lord  and  Master  in  heaven? 
Could  such  folly  and  presumption  be  expected  from  men 
v/ho,  in  every  other  respect,  had  acted  a  wise,  sober  and  con- 
sistent part,  and  rather  than  renounce  their  Redeemer,  and  a 
due  regard  to  his  institutions,  had  shown  themselves  ready 
and  willing  to  endure,  and  many  of  them  actually  did  en- 
dure, the  most  cruel  and  barbarous  sufferings,  which  the 
malice  of  their  heathen  persecutors  could  possibly  contrive 

*  Lecture  viii. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  23o 

as  Instruments  of  a  spiteful  rage  against  the  faith  of  Jesus, 
and  the  order  and  unity  which  then  adorned  his  church  ? — ■ 
Could,  for  instance,  the  zealous  and  venerable  Ignatius, 
who  was  such  an  ornament  to  that  very  period,  in  which 
the  pretended  innovation  is  supposed  to  have  taken  place ; 
' — iCould  he  have  concurred  in  the  base  presumptuous 
scheme  of  new-modelling  the  frame  and  constitution  of  the 
church,  when  his  whole  desire  was  to  contribute  to  its 
peace  and  preser^^ation,  and  to  bear  all  that  his  enemies 
could  inflict,  if  so  he  might  attain  to  be  with  its  glorious 
Head,  even  Jesus  Christ  ?  Or  could  his  illustrious  contem- 
porary, Polycarp,  the  great  light  of  the  Asiatic  churches, 
have  given  his  sanction  to  so  bold  and  impious  an  undertak- 
ing ;  the  man  who,  when  urged  to  repent  of  his  error  and 
blaspheme  Christ,  replied — "  Fourscore  and  six  years  have 
I  served  him,  and  he  never  did  me  any  harm  ;  how,  then, 
can  I  blaspheme  my  "King  and  my  Saviour?" 

Perhaps  it  will  be  said,  that  in  the  days  of  these  holy 
martyrs,  the  change  or  innovation  alluded  to,  was  only 
beginning  to  make  its  appearance,  and  by  advancing  slowly 
in  its  progress,  would  be  less  apt  to  excite  apprehension  in 
that  numerous  body  of  church  officers,  whose  station  and 
powers  in  the  church  were  at  last  so  materially  aifected  by 
it.  Our  Professor's  plan  of  parochial  Episcopacy,  as  deli- 
neated by  his  fanciful  description,  would  seem  a  deviation, 
so  small  and  inconsiderable,  from  his  apostolic  presbytery, 
as  to  create  no  alarm  in  the  minds  of  those  who  did  not, 
and  perhaps  could  not,  perceive  how  gradually  it  was  ap- 
proaching to  a  still  greater  change,  leading  insensibly  to 
what  he  calls  the  next  step  of  the  hierarchy,  "  when  pre- 
lacy, or  diocesan  Episcopacy  succeeded  the  parochial,  and 
began  generally  to  prevail."  Here  again  we  are  presented 
with  another  beginnings  and  what  our  Lecturer  thinks  a 
new  system  of  ecclesiastic  polity,  which,  not  satisfied  with 
calling  diocesan  Episcopacy^  he  chooses  also  to  distinguish 
hy  the  name  of  prelacy;  a  term  which,  in  the  vulgar  Ian- 


234  General  Defence  of  episcopacy, 

guage  of  this  country,  being  often  connected  with  popery^ 
has,  with  many,  an  invidious  meaning  attached  to  it.  Yet 
we  can  see  no  good  reason  why  this  title  should  be  consi* 
dered  as  more  descriptive  of  diocesan  than  of  parochial 
Episcopacy,  since  the  bishop  had  been  surely  as  much  a 
prelate  (prselatus),  or  person  preferred  in  his  parish^  as  he 
afterwards  was  in  his  diocese^  and  Dr.  Campbell  acknow* 
ledges,  not  only  that  "  it  was  a  proper  Episcopacy  in  re- 
spect of  the  disparity  of  the  ministers,"  which  is  the  very- 
thing  we  contend  for,  but  also  "  that  it  seems  to  have  as- 
sumed the  model  of  a  proper  Episcopate^  as  the  word  is 
now  understood,  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century." 
And  if  the  case  be  really  so,  we  should  be  glad  to  learn 
what  occasion  there  was  for  our  Professor  taking  so  much 
pains  to  establish  an  imaginary  distinction  between  his  pa- 
rochial and  diocesan  Episcopacy ;  which  may  truly  be  called 
a  "  distinction  v/ithout  a  difference,"  as  is  evidently  shown 
by  his  own  c][uotations  from  BurrHs  Ecclesiastical  Law, 
where  that  writer  justly  observes — -"  The  cathedral  church 
is  the  parish  church  of  thie  whole  diocese  ;  which  diocese 
was  therefore  commonly  called  parochia  in  ancient  times, 
till  the  application  of  this  name  to  the  lesser  branches  into 
which  it  was  divided,  made  it,  for  distinction's  sake,  to  be 
called  only  by  the  name  of  diocese."  Bingham  also,  a  very 
industrious  inquirer  into  the  antiquities  of  the  Christian 
church,  whose  authority  we  have  already  quoted  on  this 
subject,*  informs  us,  "  that  the  ancient  name  of  an  Episco- 
pal diocese  for  three  hundred  years  was  commonly  wa^owia^ 
which  some  mistake  for  a  parish  church,  or  single  congre- 
gation ;  whereas,  as  learned  men  have  rightly  observed,  it 
signified  then,  not  the  places  or  habitations  near  a  church, 
but  the  towns  or  villages  near  a  city,  which,  together  with 
the  city,  was  the  bishop's  Tra^oiHia,  or,  as  we  now  call  it,  his 
diocese,  the  bounds  of  his  ordinary  care  and  jurisdiction. 

*  See  page  186. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  235 

That  thus  it  was,  appears  evidently  from  this,  that  the 
largest  dioceses,  such  as  those  of  Rome,  Antioch,  and 
Alexandria,  which  had  many  particular  churches  in  them, 
were  called  by  the  same  name  ;  as  the  reader  may  find  an 
hundred  passages  in  Eusebius,  where  he  uses  the  word 
Ta^otxi*,  when  he  speaks  of  these  large  and  populous  cities, 
which  had  many  particular  churches  in  them." — He  then 
adds  the  testimony  of  other  writers  to  the  same  purpose, 
and  infers  from  the  whole,  "  that  nothing  can  be  plainer, 
than  the  use  of  the  word  Tra^oimoc  for  a  diocese,  to  the  fourth 
century ;  and  now  about  this  time  the  word  diocese  began 
to  be  used  likewise."* 

Such  being  the  language  and  practice  of  the  primitive 
times  with  regard  to  this  matter,  it  was  very  difficult  for 
our  Professor  to  fix  a  precise  date  for  the  beginning  of  his 
prelacy^  or  diocesan  Episcopacy^  as  distinguished  from  that 
which  was  parochial^  and  yet  was  a  proper  Episcopate, 
even  *^  as  the  word  is  now  understood."  All  that  we  find 
him  attempting  with  this  view,  is  in  a  passage  of  his  eighth 
X-ecture,  where,  speaking  of  "  the  first  subdivision  of  the 
pastoral  charge  into  smaller  precincts,  since  called  parishes, 
the  name  which  had  formerly  belonged  to  the  whole,"  he 
says,  "  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that  there  had  been  instances 
of  it  in  great  cities,  long  before  the  expiration  of  the  third 
century,  in  some,  perhaps  in  Rome,  Alexandria,  Antioch, 
even  before  the  expiration  of  the  second,  though  it  was  far 
from  being  general  till  a  considerable  time  after  the  third."'!' 
But  as  we  agree  with  the  Professor  in  this,  that "  a  pastor's 
charge  is  properly  the  people,  not  the  place,"  we  can  see 
no  difference  in  the  nature  of  prelacy,  or  Episcopacy,  whe- 
ther the  place  in  wich  the  people  reside,  who  are  under  the 
bishop's  charge,  be  called  a  parish  or  a  diocese ;  or  whether 
his  charge  be  of  larger  or  smaller  extent.     It  is  the  pre- 


*  See  Bm^bam'i  Antiquities,  vol,  iii.  p.  345,  346, 
t  Lecture  viii. 


tS(y  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy, 

eminence  of  office,  or  the  superior  authority  annexed  to  the 
Episcopal  character,  that  gives  the  true  criterion  of  prelacy; 
and  at  whatever  period  that  mark  of  distinction  first  ap- 
peared in  the  Christian  church,  if  it  did  not  originate  from 
the  apostles,  and  show  itself  in  their  immediate  successors, 
it  must  have  been  considered  as  a  very  striking  encroach- 
ment on  the  powers  possessed  by  the  parochial  college  of 
presbyters.  They  must  thus  have  been  reduced  to  a  state 
of  subordination  and  dependence,  which  it  was  strange  that 
they  did  not  perceive  to  be  the  effect  of  unwarranted  usur- 
pation on  the  part  of  the  bishops,  and,  therefore,  to  be  re- 
sisted by  the  presbyters  with  a  degree  of  firmness  and  re- 
solution worthy  of  the  sacred  and  equal  trust  which  had 
been  committed  to  them. 

Our  Lecturer  was  aware,  how  unaccountable  this  must 
appear  to  every  person  acquainted  with  the  common  feel- 
ings of  human  nature,  and,  therefore,  has  endeavoured  td 
obviate  the  difficulty  in  the  best  manner  he  could.  "  Some," 
he  says,  "  have  represented  it,  as  an  insuperable  objection 
to  the  presbyterian  hypothesis,  concerning  the  rise  of  Epis- 
copal superiority,  that  it  seems  to  imply  so  great  ambition 
in  one  part,  and  so  great  supineness  (not  to  give  it  a  worse 
name)  in  the  rest  of  the  primitive  pastors  ordained  by  the 
apostles,  and  by  the  apostolic  men  that  came  after  them, 
as  is  perfectly  incredible.  This  they  seem  to  think  a  de- 
monstration a  priori^  that  the  thing  is  impossible."*  And 
we  certainly  do  think  it,  if  not  impossible,  yet  at  least 
highly  improbable,  and  a  thing  which  has  never  yet  oc- 
curred in  any  similar  case,  either  recorded  in  history,  or 
handed  down  by  tradition.  Dr.  Campbell,  however,  is 
very  ingenious  in  pointing  out  the  causes  and  motives, 
which,  in  his  opinion,  might  lead  to  it ;  ••'  and  so  far,"  says 
he,  "  am  I  from  thinking  that  the  ambition  or  the  vices  of 
^he  first  ministers  gave  rise  to  their  authority,  that  I  am 

*  Lecture  vi. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  237 

certain  that  this  effect  is  much  more  justly  ascribed  to  their 
virtues.  An  aspiring  disposition  rouses  jealousy — ^jealousy 
puts  people  on  their  guard.  There  needs  no  more  to  check 
ambition,  whilst  it  remains  unarmed  with  either  wealth  or 
power.  But  there  is  nothing  which  men  are  not  ready  to 
yield  to  distinguished  merit,  especially  when  matters  are 
in  that  state,  wherein  every  kind  of  pre-eminence,  instead 
of  procuring  wealth  and  secular  advantages,  exposes  but  to 
greater  danger,  and  to  greater  suffering." 

Such  is  the  train  of  reasoning,  with  a  good  deal  more  to 
the  same  purpose,  made  use  of  by  our  Professor,  to  over- 
throw the  *'  demonstration,"  to  which  he  had  alluded,  and 
to  make  it  appear,  that  the  rise  of  Episcopal  superiority  is 
to  be  accounted  for,  by  ascribing  it  to  distinguished  merit, 
and  distinguished  danger,  on  the  part  of  those  who -were 
promoted  to  that  superior  dignity.  That  the  first  of  these 
causes  could  not  operate  in  giving  rise  to  the  "  Episcopal 
superiority,"  is  evident  from  what  has  been  already  said 
on  the  nature  of  it.  And  if  this  superiority  be  considered 
as  a  bold  deviation  from  the  plan  of  ecclesiastic  polity  laid 
down  by  our  Lord's  apostles,  and  a  presumptuous  depar- 
ture from  the  parity  which  they  had  established,  it  could 
not  possibly  receive  any  countenance  or  support  from  men 
of  "  distinguished  merit"  in  the  service  of  the  church. 
With  such  a  character,  they  could  never  think  of  introduc- 
ing, much  less  of  accepting,  any  superiority  or  pre-eminence 
above  their  equal  brethren,  whereby  they  might  make  them- 
selves lords  over  God's  heritage,  in  the  manner  which  he 
had  forbidden.  This  was  a  species  of  merit  as  unknown 
to  these  primitive  times,  as  it  was  unworthy  of  the  Chris- 
tian pastors  who  lived  in  them.  The  pious  Irenseus  of 
Lyons,  the  zealous  Cyprian  of  Carthage,  with  his  contem- 
poraries, Fabian  and  Cornelius  of  Rome,  and  many  more 
whom  we  could  name  of  the  "  noble  army  of  martyrs," 
were  as  much  prelates^  or  diocesan  bishops^  as  any  that  ever 
came  after  them  under  that  denomination,  and  some  of 


238  General  Befence  of  Episcopacy, 

them  lived  at  the  times,  when  even  Dr.  Campbell  admits 
the  introduction  of  diocesan  Episcopacy  in  a  variety  of  in- 
stances. Is  it  then  to  be  supposed,  that  all  these  holy  and 
venerable  prelates  would  encounter  the  severest  trials,  and 
yield  themselves  to  a  violent  death,  in  the  humble  hope 
of  receiving  a  crown  of  life,  for  assuming  a  superiority 
which  did  not  belong  to  them,  and  transgressing  the  limits 
assigned  to  their  ministerial  order  by  that  Lord,  from  whom 
the  whole  power  of  it  was  derived,  and  the  whole  reward 
of  a  faithful  discharge  of  duty  to  be  expected  t  If  such  a 
conduct  was  far  from  giving  them  any  merit  in  the  sight  of 
God,  it  ought  as  little  to  have  procured  for  them  any  ho- 
nourable mark  of  distinction  among  men  ;  especially  among 
their  fellow  pastors,  who  were  thus  held  out  as  placed  in 
an  inferior  station,  on  account  of  their  inferior  merit,  or 
rather  because  they  had  no  merit  at  all,  not  even  that  of 
resisting  such  a  daring  innovation,  and  striving  to  preserve 
the  rights  of  their  own  order  from  being  swallowed  up  by 
this  usurped  superiority  of  rank,  which,  though  but  newly 
introduced,  was  rapidly  spreading,  under  the  name  of  diQ- 
cesan  Episcopacy, 

.  It  is  strange  indeed,  that  through  all  the  churches  of 
Asia,  Africa,  and  Europe,  the  "  senior  brother"  in  every 
college  of  pastors,  should  thus  at  once  have  trampled  on 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  his  colleagues,  as  if  a  general 
consj.iracy  had  been  entered  into  for  that  purpose  :  and  yet 
it  is  still  more  strange  and  unaccountable,  that  not  one  oi 
these  innumerable  pastors  should  have  made  a  single  re-*  ^ 
monstrance  against  so  flagrant  an  usurpation,  as  if  they  too 
had  all  combined,  at  one  and  the  same  time,  to  betray  their 
trust,  and  allow  themselves  to  be  thus  shamefully  degraded* 
It  is  as  impossible  to  conceive  that  any  such  thing  should 
have  happened  then,  as  to  believe  now,  that  all  the  mode-^ 
rators  of  the  several  synods  under  the  Scotch  establishment, 
would  be  allowed  to  assume  at  once  not  only  the  title,  but 
the  superior  rank  and  authority,  of  diocesan  bishops,  with; 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  239 

®ut  the  smallest  opposition  from  any  one  member  of  these 
synods,  or  the  least  notice  taken  of  such  a  wondei-ful 
change  of  system.-— Nay,  the  difficulty  must  be  much 
greater,  if  we  wish  to  make  the  cases  similar:  For  then  we 
must  suppose  the  whole  of  Christendom  to  be  under  the 
same  form  of  church  government  as  that  which  is  esta- 
blished in  this  northern  part  of  Britain  ;  to  be  convinced  too 
that  this  form  of  government  is  of  apostolic  institution, 
and  yet  permit  a  few  aspiring  ecclesiastics  to  overturn  it, 
and  introduce  in  all  the  Christian  churches  a  new,  unknown 
scheme  of  "  Episcopal  superiority^"  favourable  only  to  the 
views  of  those  who  were  its  first  contrivers. 

It  is  further  to  be  considered,  that  these  few  ambitious 
prelates,  who  were  thus  so  astonishingly  successful  in  get- 
ting themselves  acknowledged  to  be  true  diocesan  bishops, 
were  widely  scattered  over  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  for  the 
most  part  knew  very  little  of  one  another,  and  could  hold 
no  general  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  concerting  their  plan, 
or  of  obtaining  the  sanction  of  civil  power  to  recommend  it. 
And  yet  so  it  happened,  that  under  all  these  disadvantages, 
they  could  contrive  to  learn  each  other's  sentiments,  to  think 
and  act  alike  in  every  stage  of  this  refined  system  of  policy, 
and  at  length  were  able  to  exhibit  an  entire  new  form  of 
ecclesiastic  government,  under  the  name  of  diocesan  Epis-' 
'copacy  ;  nay,  had  the  amazing  address  to  persuade  the 
whole  Christian  world,  that  so  far  from  any  change  having 
taken  place,  the  church  of  Christ  had  all  along,  from  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  been  Episcopal.  Nothing  can  add  to 
the  degree  of  surprise,  which  must  be  excited  by  all  this 
inexplicable  procedure,  unless  it  be  the  consideration  of 
what  Dr.  Campbell  mentions  as  another  cause  of  the  rise 
of  Episcopal  pre-eminence,  that  "  instead  of  procuring 
wealth  and  secular  advantages,  it  only  exposed  to  gixater 
danger,  and  to  greater  suffering."  This,  we  believe,  was 
really  the  case,  in  the  severe  and  tr)  ing  times  to  which  we 
are  now  looking  back.    As  soon  as  an  edict  passed  for  per- 


240  General  Defence  of  Episcopacip* 

secuting  the  Christians  in  any  part  of  the  church,  the  bi»- 
shops  were  immediately  aimed  at,  as  the  most  guilty  per- 
sons, and  the  first  that  were  exposed  to  the  fury  of  their 
persecutors.  As  their  danger  was  thus  imminent,  their 
labour  too  was  often  no  less  severe  ;  for  upon  them  was 
laid  the  principal  care  of  the  flock,  which  frequently  re- 
quired the  greatest  vigilance  and  attention  in  the  shepherd. 
To  the  undergoing  all  this  toil  and  trouble,  they  were 
impelled  by  a  sense  of  duty ;  and  were  supported  under  it, 
by  the  hope  of  having  their  services  accepted  by  their  bles- 
sed Master.  But  could  they  have  felt  the  force  of  this 
motive,  or  indulged  this  hope,  had  they  been  conscious 
at  the  same  time,  that  they  were  violating  his  commands, 
and  arrogating  to  themselv^es  a  power  and  pre-eminence, 
which  he  had  expressly  forbidden  ?  And  of  this  they  must 
have  been  conscious,  had  their  Episcopal  superiority  been 
an  infringement  of  the  apostolic  institution,  and  an  entire 
subversion  of  that  system  of  ecclesiastic  parity,  which, 
by  their  Lord's  command,  the  teachers  of  the  nations  had 
formed  and  left  with  his  church,  that  it  might  be  there  re- 
tained to  the  end  of  the  world. 

In  accounting  for  so  early  and  so  universal  a  departure 
from  this  supposed  system  of  equality  among  the  first  Chris- 
tian pastors,  our  Lecturer  alludes  to  the  origin  of  civil 
government,  and  thinks  it  "  easy  to  evince,  that  the  parallel 
case  of  monarchy  will,  in  the  nature  of  things,  be  found 
equally  impossible."*  The  friends  of  that  form  of  govern- 
ment will,  no  doubt,  think  it  equally  easy  to  remove  this 
impossibility,  by  bringing  what  they  take  to  be  clear,  un- 
questionable evidence,  that  monarchy,  as  well  as  Episco- 
pacy, is  founded  on  divine  appointment.  But  supposing 
the  case  to  be  otherwise,  and  that  monarchy,  or,  as  our 
Professor  calls  it,  "  the  dominion  of  one  man  over  innu- 
merable multitudes  of  men,"  was  really  a  breach  of  their 

*  Lecture  vi. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  241 

original  equality,  and  an  encroachment  on  those  "  natural 
rights  of  man,"  the  maintaining  of  which  has  ofte^n  made 
a  noise  in  the  world,  and,  of  late  years,  has  been  attended 
with  the  most  shocking  barbarities  ;  is  it  then  possible  to 
believe,  that  such  revolutions  work  their  way  in  a  calm 
and  quiet  manner,  and  are  allowed  to  pass  without  notice, 
as  the  effects  of  natural  causes,  "  in  the  ordinary  progres- 
sion of  human  things  ?"— Yet  of  a  similar  nature,  though* 
perhaps  not  so  difficult  to  be  accomplished,  was  the  change, 
which  is  supposed  to  have  taken  place  in  the  church,  by  the 
introduction  of  prelacy,  or  the  setting  up  in  every  diocese, 
one  pastor  above  the  rest,  vested  with  all  the  powers,  which 
have  ever  since  been  assigned  to  the  Episcopal  office. 
Such  a  change  as  this  from  that  pastoral  equality,  which, 
it  is  said,  had  previously  subsisted  from  the  days  of  the 
apostles,  we  should  think,  must  have  excited  some  alarm, 
or  produced  some  disturbance  in  the  church,  or  at  least 
have  been  taken  some  notice  of,  by  the  many  writers,  who 
record  the  transactions  of  that  very  period  in  which  this 
remarkable  change  is  pretended  to  have  happened. 

Let  us  but  consider  the  high  regard  always  expressed 
among  the  primitive  Christians  for  every  thing  which  they 
believed  to  be  of  apostolic  institution  ;  what  a  controversy, 
for  instance,  was  raised  on  that  account,  and  carried  on  for 
many  years,  with  the  greatest  zeal  on  both  sides,  about  the 
proper  time  of  observing  Easter,  the  annual  festival  which 
they  all  celebrated  in  memory  of  our  Lord's  resurrection. 
And  when  such  a  question  as  this  was  deemed  to  be  of  so 
much  importance,  although  it  regarded  merely  the  day  that 
was  supposed  to  be  fixed  on  by  the  apostles,  can  it  be  ima- 
gined that  the  constitution  and  form  of  government  which 
they  had  established  in  the  church,  would  not  be  held  in 
the  highest  veneration,  or  that  every  care  would  not  be 
taken  to  preserve  it  pure  and  entire  in  the  very  state  in 
which  the  apostles  had  left  it?  When  any  schism  or  heresy 
broke  out  in  those  days,  we  find  the  abettors  of  it  assigning 

31 


242  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

various  causes,  and  often  at  a  loss  what  to  assign  for  their' 
breaking  away  from  the  communion  of  the  church,  andy 
as  it  was  then  called,  "  setting  up  altar  against  altar."  But 
had  they  known,  or  suspected,  that  any  change  or  inno- 
vation had  been  introduced  into  the  government  of  the 
church,  such  as  our  modern  opposers  of  prelacy,  or  Epis- 
copacy, represent  it  to  be,  they  would  have  eagerly  brought 
it  forward,  as  a  sufficient  reason  for  their  abandoning  a  so- 
ciety which  had  submitted  to  such  irregular  and  usurped 
authority.  The  authors  of  this  ambitious  project  would 
have  been  held  up  to  popular  indignation,  as  "  lording  it 
over  God's  heritage,"  and  it  would  not  have  been  left  to 
the  declaimers  "  in  our  more  enhghtened  times,"  to  ex- 
hibit in  its  proper  colours  "  the  priestly  pride  of  such  pre- 
latical  preachers."  Yet  nothing  of  this  kind  was  ever 
heard  of,  in  the  times  to  which  we  are  now  referring.  No 
ecclesiastical  historian  of  that  or  the  succeeding  ages  takes 
the  least  notice  of  any  such  departure  from  apostolic  insti- 
tution :  No  adversary  of  the  church  in  those  days  ever  ob- 
jected to  it :  And  from  all  this  silence  both  in  friends  and 
enemies  ;  from  nothing  being  said  either  to  justify  or  con- 
demn the  change  that  is  supposed  to  have  happened,  we 
may  certainly  conclude  that  no  such  change  had  taken 
place  ;  but  that  the  government  of  the  church  had  still  con- 
tinued, without  any  interruption,  what  the  apostles  had 
left  it,  a  proper  and  regular  Episcopacy,  whether  we  call 
it  parochial  or  diocesan,  which  makes  no  difference  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  institution,  or  the  authority  on  which  it 
was  founded. 

We  may,  therefore,  sum  up  ^hat  has-  been  said  on  this 
point,  in  the  words  of  a  most  learned  and  distinguished 
divine,  whose  works  have  been  long  admired  for  their 
genuine  piety,  and  who,  in  asserting  Episcopacy  to  be  of 
divine  institution,  appeals  thus  to  the  faith  and  practice  of 
Christendom — "  Be  ye  followers  of  me,  as  I  am  of  Christ, 
is  an  apostolical  precept.     We  have  seen  how  the  apostles 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  243 

have  followed  Christ,  how  their  tradition  is  consequent  of 
divine  institution.  Next  let  us  see  how  the  church  has 
followed  the  apostles,  as  the  apostles  have  followed  Christ. 
Catholic  practice  is  the  next  basis  of  the  power  and  order 
of  Episcopacy.  For — let  us  consider — Is  it  imaginable 
that  all  the  world  should,  immediately  after  the  death  of 
the  apostles,  conspire  together,  to  seek  themselves,  and 
not  the  things  that  are  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  erect  a  go- 
vernment of  their  own  devising,  not  ordained  by  Christ, 
not  delivered  by  his  apostles,  and  to  relinquish  a  divine 
foundation,  and  the  apostolical  superstructure,  which,  if  it 
was  at  all,  was  a  part  of  our  Master's  will,  which  whoso- 
ever knew  and  observed  not,  was  to  be  beaten  with  many 
stripes  ?  Is  it  imaginable,  that  those  gallant  men,  who 
could  not  be  brought  off  from  the  prescriptions  of  gen- 
tilism,  to  the  seeming  impossibilities  of  Christianity,  with- 
out evidence  of  miracle,  and  clearness  of  demonstration 
upon  agreed  principles,  should  all,  upon  their  first  adhesion 
to  Christianity,  make  an  universal  dereliction  of  so  consi- 
derable a  part  of  their  Master's  will,  and  leave  gentilism 
to  destroy  Christianity;  for  he  that  erects  another  economy 
than  what  the  Master  of  the  family  hath  ordained,  destroys 
all  those  relations  of  mutual  dependence  which  Christ  hath 
made  for  the  conjunction  of  all  the  parts  of  it,  and  so  de- 
stroys it  in  the  formality  of  a  Christian  congregation  or 
family  ? — Is  it  then  imaginable,  that  all  those  glorious  mar- 
tyrs, that  were  so  strict  observers  of  divine  sanctions  and 
canons  apostolical,  would  be  also  so  assiduous  in  contemn- 
ing the  government  that  Christ  left  for  his  family,  and 
erect  another  ?  To  what  purpose  were  all  their  watchings, 
their  banishments,  their  fears,  their  fastings,  and  formida- 
ble austerities,  and,  finally,  their  so  frequent  martyrdoms  ? 
Of  what  excellency  or  avail,  if,  after  all,  they  should  be 
hurried  out  of  the  world,  and  all  their  fortunes  and  posses- 
sions, by  untimely,  by  disgraceful,  by  dolorous  deaths,  to 
be  set  before  a  tribunal,  to  give  account  of  their  universal 


g44  General  Defence  of  EptscQpactf» 

neglect,  and  contemning  of  Christ's  last  testament,  in  5^ 
great  an  affair  as  the  whole  government  of  his  church  ;  If 
all  Christendom  should  be  guilty  of  so  open,  so  united  9. 
defiance  against  their  Master,  by  what  argument  or  confi- 
lience  can  any  misbeliever  be  persuaded  to  Christianity, 
which,  in  all  its  members,  for  so  many  ages  together,  is  so 
unlike  its  first  institution  as  in  its  most  public  affair,  and 
for  matter  of  order  of  the  most  general  concernment,  is  so 
contrary  to  the  first  birth?  Where  are  the  promises  of 
Christ's  perpetual  assistance,  of  the  impregnable  perma- 
nence of  the  church  against  the  gates  of  hell,  of  the  spirit 
of  truth  to  lead  it  into  all  truth,  if  she  be  guilty  of  so 
grand  an  error  as  to  erect  a  throne,  where  Christ  hath 
made  all  level,  or  appointed  others  to  sit  in  it,  than  whom 
he  suffers  ?  Either  Christ  hath  left  no  government,  or  most 
certainly  the  church  hath  retained  that  government,  what- 
isoever  it  is."*  And  he  concludes  the  whole  of  his  reason- 
ing on  this  subject  with  the  application  of  that  golden  rule 
of  Vincentius  Lirinensis— •"  We  must  take  care  above  all 
things  to  adhere  to  that  which  has  been  believed,  in  all 
places,  at  all  times,  and  by  all  persons ;  for  this  is  truly 
and  properly  catholic :"  And  nothing  was  ever  more  so 
than  the  government  of  the  church  by  bishops.  Therefore, 
as  the  same  ancient  author  observes-^"  It  never  was,  is, 
nor  ever  shall  be  lawful  to  teach  Christian  people  any  other 
thing,  than  that  which  has  been  received"t  from  a  primi- 
tive fountain,  and  has  descended  in  the  stream  of  catholic, 
uninterrupted  succession. 

*  See  section  xxii.  of  an  excellent  tract,  entitled — "  Of  the  sacred  Or- 
der and  Offices  of  Episcopacy  "  &c.  bound  up  with  the  other  polemical 
■works  of  Dr  Jeremy  Taylor,  chaplkin  to  Charles  the  First,  and  bishop 
of  Down  and  Connor. 

f  •*  Magnopere  curandum  est,  ut  id  teneamus  quod  ubique,  quod  sem- 
per, quod  ab  omn<bus  creditum  est.  Hoc  est  enim  vere  proprieque  ca- 
tholicum. — Annunciare  ergo  Christlanis  catholicis.  praeter  id  quod  acce- 
perunt,  nunquam  licuit,  nunquam  licet,  nunquam  licebit."  Vincent.  Li- 
y'm.  adv.  Hseres.  cap.  3—14. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  245 

In  opposition,  however,  to  all  these  testimonies  of  an- 
cient times,  which  have  been  brought  forward  in  support 
of  the  apostolic  or  Episcopal  succession,  there  is  an  argu- 
ment still  used  by  some  writers,  to  lessen  the  force  of  so 
much  accumulated  evidence,  by  impressing  on  the  mind 
as  much  doubt  and  uncertaint}^  as  possible,  with  regard  to 
the  manner  in  which  this  succession  has  been  preserved^ 
or  carried  on,  from  one  age  of  the  church  to  another.  The 
danger  of  its  failing,  and  the  difficulty  of  knowing  whether 
it  has  not  so  failed,  or  suffered  interruption,  were,  there* 
fore,  topics,  cf  which  our  learned  Professor  would  not  fail 
to  lay  hold,  when  striving  to  maintain  his  opinion,  that 
*'  the  validity  of  God's  covenant,"  as  he  expresses  himself, 
*'  cannot  depend  on  the  ministry,  or  his  promises  be  ren- 
dered ineffectual  to  the  humble  believer  on  account  of  any 
defect  in  the  priesthood."  To  this  he  had  been  alluding 
in  the  beginning  of  his  fourth  Lecture,  and  after  pointing 
©ut  the  difficulty  of  "  examining  the  import  of  names  and 
titles,  and  the  authenticity  of  endless  genealogies,"  he  re- 
curs to  the  subject,  as  an  inference  from  the  case  of  the 
thankful  Samaritan,  whose  faith  was  accepted,  although  he 
did  not  go  and  show  himself  to  the  priests:  And  yet— 
1*  no  order  of  men,"  says  our  Lecturer,  "  existing  at  pre- 
sent in  the  Christian  church,  can  give  any  evidence  of  a 
divine  right,  compared  with  that  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  and 
of  the  posterity  of  Aaron  in  the  Jewish."*  Now,  if  we 
should  say,  that  the  very  reverse  of  this  is  the  case,  the 
position  might  be  safely  maintained  on  this  ground,  that  it 
could  not  be  so  easily  proved,  that  no  spurious  child  had 
ever  been  introduced  into  the  family  of  the  high  priest,  as 
that  no  unordained  person  had  ever  been  admitted  to  the 
Episcopal  office.  But,  indeed,  we  have  good  reason  to 
beheve,  that  in  either  case,  nothing  of  this  kind  has  ever 
happened.    It  was  sufficient  for  the  Israelite  to  know,  that 

*  Lecture  iv. 


246  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy^ 

the  priesthood  under  the  law  having  been  established  in  the 
family  of  Aaron,  no  doubt  had  ever  been  entertained  of 
that  family  being  preserved  pure  from  any  illegitimate 
mixture.  And  the  Christian  has  at  least  equal  ground  to 
be  satisfied,  that  the  government  of  the  church  under  the 
gospel  having  been  established  by  the  apostles,  in  the  way 
of  Episcopal  succession,  that  succession  has  never  yet  failed 
in  the  Christian  world,  however  it  may  have  been  in  some 
places  despised,  for  two  or  three  centuries  past,  and 
thrown  aside  as  unnecessary. 

It  is  a  circumstance,  that  must  be  well  known  to  those 
who  are  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the  Christian 
church,  that  for  the  preservation  of  the  Episcopal  succes- 
sion, nothing  more  was  requisite  than  a  proper  observance 
of  the  canons  made  by  the  church  for  that  purpose,  and  a 
due  regard  to  the  doctrine,  on  which  these  canons  were 
founded.  It  was  always  a  received  doctrine  in  every  part 
of  the  church,  that  no  ordination  was  valid,  but  that  of 
bishops ;  and  the  earliest  canons  required,  that  every 
bishop  should  be  ordained  or  consecrated  by  two  or  three 
bishops.  By  this  means,  the  Episcopal  succession  has  been 
carefully  preserved  in  every  age,  from  the  days  of  the 
apostles  to  the  present  time  ;  and  since  it  was  universally 
believed,  that  none  but  bishops  could  ordain,  it  was  mo- 
rally impossible,  that  any  person  could  be  received  as 
bishops,  who  had  not  been  so  ordained.  This  was  the 
reason,  which  Mr.  Law  assigned  for  the  security  of  the 
Episcopal  succession,  in  one  of  his  admirable  letters  to 
Bishop  Hoadly^  and  then  applied  it  in  this  manner — "  Now, 
is  it  not  morally  impossible,  that  in  our  church  any  one 
should  be  made  a  bishop  without  Episcopal  ordination? 
Is  there  any  possibility  of  forging  orders,  or  steahng  a 
bishopric  by  any  other  stratagem  ?  No  ;  it  is  morally  im- 
possible, because  it  is  an  acknowledged  doctrine  amongst 
us,  that  a  bishop  can  only  be  ordained  by  bishops.  Now, 
as  this  doctrine  must  necessarily  prevent  any  one  being  a 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  247 

bishop  without  Episcopal  ordination  in  our  age,  so  it  must 
have  the  same  effect  in  every  other  age,  as  well  as  ours ; 
and,  consequently,  it  is  as  reasonable  to  believe,  that  the 
Succession  of  bishops  was  not  broke  in  any  age  since  the 
aposdes,  as  that  it  was  not  broke  in  our  own  kingdom 
within  these  forty  years.  For  the  same  doctrine,  which 
preserves  it  forty  years,  may  as  well  preserve  it  forty  hun- 
dred years,  if  it  was  equally  believed  in  all  that  space  of 
time.  And  that  this  has  been  the  constant  doctrine  of  the 
church,  we  have  the  most  undoubted  evidence.  We  be- 
lieve the  scriptures  are  not  corrupted,  because  it  was 
always  a  received  doctrine  in  the  church,  that  they  were 
the  standing  rule  of  faith,  and  because  the  providence  of 
God  may  well  be  supposed  to  preserve  such  books,  as  were 
to  convey  to  every  age  the  means  of  salvation.  The  same 
reasons  prove  the  great  improbability  that  this  succession 
should  ever  be  broke,  both  because  it  was  always  against  a 
received  doctrine  to  break  it,  and  because  we  may  justly 
hope  the  providence  of  God  would  keep  up  his  own  insti- 
tution."* 

Such  is  the  clear,  satisfactory  train  of  reasoning,  by 
which  a  decisive  answer  is  at  once  afforded  to  all  the  "  dark 
and  critical  questions,"  that  can  possibly  arise,  even  in  such 
a  fertile  mind,  as  that  of  our  late  learned  Lecturer,  "  about 
the  import  of  names  and  titles,  and  the  authenticity  of  end- 
less genealogies,"  the  examination  of  which  did  not  appear 
in  such  a  formidable  view,  in  the  dawn  of  the  reformation, 
and  when,  after  a  lapse  of  near  a  thousand  years,  men  be- 
gan again  to  look  into  these  questions,  and  to  inquire  into 


*  See  the  second  of  the  Three  Letters  written  by  the  Rev.  William 
Law  to  Bishop  Hoadly,  and  lately  reprinted  in  a  collection  of  tracts, 
called  "  The  Scholar  armed  against  the  Errors  of  the  Tir)ie,"  l^c.  la 
the  preface  to  which,  this  reason  is  assigned  for  republishing  Mr.  Law's 
Letters,  that — •'  though  incomparable  for  truth  of  argument,  brightness 
of  wit,  and  purity  of  English,  and  honoured  with  the  highest  admira- 
tion at  their  first  appearance,  they  are  now  in  a  manner  forgotten." 


248  General  Defence  of  Episcopacif, 

the  foundation  of  that  ecclesiastical  authority,  which  they 
still  saw  to  be  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  the  faith, 
the  unity  and  order  of  the  church.  Even  those  who  are 
considered  as  the  l"ounders  of  the  presbyterian  form  of 
church  government,  did  not  object  to  Episcopacy,  on  ac- 
count of  an}'  doubt  or  uncertainty  as  to  the  regular  succes- 
sion of  bishops.  So  far  from  entertaining  any  suspicion  or 
prejudice  of  that  kind,  they  reckoned  it  a  most  unjust 
aspersion  to  say,  that  they  condemned  or  threw  off  Epis- 
copacy, because  they  were  obliged  to  do  without  it  in 
Geneva,  where  they  thought  it  impossible  to  have  bishops, 
without  submitting  to  that  papal  supremacy,  which  they 
had  lately  renounced.  But  as  this  was  not  the  case  in 
England,  they  highly  applauded  the  Episcopal  hierarchy 
of  the  English  church,  and  congratulated  the  nation  on 
their  happiness  in  retaining  it.  This  appears  from  their 
several  letters  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  others  of  the  English  bishops,  in  which 
they  earnestly  prayed  to  God  for  the  continuance  of  so 
great  a  blessing,  bemoaned  their  own  unhappy  circumstances 
in  being  deprived  of  it,  because  they  had  no  magistrate  to 
protect  them,  and  owned  that  the  want  of  Episcopacy  Was 
a  great  defect,  but  called  it  their  misfortune  rather  than  their 
fault. — '^  As  for  their  excuse,"  we  shall  only  say,  in  the 
words  of  a  masterly  writer  on  this  subject,  "  we  do  not 
now  meddle  with  it,  for,  we  think,  it  was  not  a  good  one  ; 
they  might  have  had  bishops  from  other  places,  though 
there  were  none  among  themselves  but  those  who  were 
popish,  and  they  might  as  well  have  had  bishops  as  pres- 
byters, without  the  countenance  of  the  civil  magistrate. 
It  might  have  raised  a  great  persecution  against  them,  but 
that  is  nothing  as  to  the  truth  of  the  thing ;  and  if  they 
thought  it  a  truth,  they  ought  to  have  suffered  for  it."^ 


•  See  a  "  Discourse  on  the  ^ialificatio7is  requisite  to  administer  the  Sa- 
craments,'" by  the  celebrated  Charles  Leslie,  and  republished,  with  n:ai)/ 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  JS49 

But  whatever  weight  may  be  allowed  to  their  plea  of 
necessity,  it  is  evident,  from  their  having  recourse  to  it  as 
an  excuse  for  their  conduct,  that  they  considered  the  refor- 
mation, in  which  they  were  engaged,  as  a  renouncing  and 
withdrawing  from,  not  pure  and  genuine  Episcopacy,  but 
the  corruptions,  which  papal  usurpation  had  grafted  upon 
it.  This  is  plainly  and  openly  avowed  by  their  great  leader 
Calvin,  who,  in  opposing  the  claims  of  the  Romish  church, 
says — "  If  they  would  give  us  an  hierarchy,  in  which  the 
bishops  did  so  rise  above  others,  as  that  they  would  not 
refuse  to  be  subject  to  Christ,  and  to  depend  on  him  as 
their  only  Head^  and  be  referred  to  him ;  in  which  they 
would  so  preserve  brotherly  communion  among  themselves, 
as  to  be  united  by  nothing  so  much  as  his  truth,  then,  in- 
deed, I  should  confess,  that  there  is  no  anathema,  of  which 
those  persons  are  not  worthy^  if  any  such  there  be,  who 
would  not  reverence  such  an  hierarchy,  and  submit  to  it 
with  the  utmost  obedience."^  And  such  an  hierarchy  he 
acknowledges  that  the  church  of  England  possessed,  to 
which  he  therefore  professes  to  give  both  inward  rever- 
ence, and  outward  respect,  assuring  the  bishops,  that  he 
would  gladly  have  served  them,  in  settling  the  affairs  of 
their  church. 


of  his  otlher  tracts,  m  the  Scholar  Armed,  &c.  And  in  confirmation  of 
the  truth  of  Mr.  Leslie's  remark,  ♦*  that  the  Genevan  reformers  might 
have  had  bishops  from  other  places,"  see  an  Ecclesiastical  History  of 
Scotland,  &c.  by  the  Rev.  John  Skinner,  vol.  ii.  p,  130,  &c.  where  an 
account  is  given  of  no  fe^yer  than  ten  bishops,  who,  in  the  beginning  of 
the  reformation,  renounced  the  errors  of  popery,  and  could  have  been 
the  means  of  preserving  the  Episcopal  order  in  any  society  that  chose  to 
accept  of  it. 

*  "  Talem  si  nobis  hierarchiam  exhibeant,  in  qua  sic  emineant  Epis- 
copi,  ut  Christo  subesse  non  recusent,  et  ab  illo  tanquam  unico  capite 
pendeant,  et  ad  ipsum  referantur;  in  qua  sic  inter  se  fraternam  societa- 
tem  colant,  ut  non  alio  modo  quam  ejus  veritate  sint  coUigati,  tum  vero 
nullo  non  anathemate  dignos  fatear,  si  qui  erunt,  qui  non  earn  reverean- 
tur,  sunimaque  obsdientia  observent." — De  Kcce^s.  £cc/es.  Eeform. 

32 


SiSO  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy 

To  the  same  purpose  we  find  Beza  expressing  his  senti- 
ments, in  language  as  strong  as  it  was  possible  to  use  on 
such  an  occasion—"  If,  however,  there  be  any,"  says  he, 
"  which  you  can  hardly  make  me  believe,  who  reject  the 
whole  order  of  bishops,  God  forbid  that  any  man  of  a 
sound  mind  should  assent  to  the  madness  of  such  persons."^ 
And  speaking  of  the  government  of  the  church  of  Eng- 
land by  bishops,  he  says—"  Let  her  enjoy  that  singulai^ 
blessing  of  God,  which  I  wish  may  be  ever  continued  to 
her.^'t  Many  more  testimonies  of  a  similar  nature  might 
be  produced,  to  show  how  little  countenance  was  given  by 
these  leading  reformers  abroad  to  their  pretended  fol- 
lowers in  this  coumry,  who  would  be  satisfied  with  nothing 
less  than  the  entire  abolition  of  Episcopacy,  as  "  being  a 
great  and  insupportable  grievance,  and  contrary  to  the  in- 
clinations of  the  generality  of  the  pttople."}  It  were  easy 
to  show  how  widely  they  diifered  in  this  respect  from  those 
whom  thev  considered  as  promoting  the  same  cause  ia 
other  countries.  One  remarkable  instance  of  such  differ- 
ence of  sentiment  appears  from  what  is  recorded  of  the 
learned  Blondel,  who  is  said  to  have  concluded  his  "  apo* 
logy  for  the  opinion  of  Jerome,"  with  words  to  this  pur- 
pose— "  By  all  that  we  have  said  to  assert  the  rights  of  the 
presbytery,  we  do  not  intend  to  invalidate  the  ancient  and 
apostolical  constitution  of  Episcopal  pre-eminence.  But 
we  believe,  that  wheresoever  it  is  established  conformably 
to  the  ancient  canons,  it  must  be  carefully  preserved ;  and 
wheresoever  by  some  heat  of  contention,  or  otherwise,  it 
has  been  put  down  or  violated,  it  ought  to  be  reverently 
restored-"    We  are  farther  informed,  that  "  as  the  book 

*  "  Si  qui  sunt  autem,  (quod  sane  mihi  baud  facile  persuaseris)  qui 
omnem  Episcoporum  ordinem  rejiciunt,  absit,  ut  quisquam  satis  sanac 
jpentis  furoribus  illorum  assentiatur." 

t  "  Fruatur  sane  ista  singulari  Dei  beneficentia,  quae  utinam  sit  illi 
pevpetua."     Tract,  vie  Minist.  Eccl.  Grad.  cap.  i.  et  xviii.  - 

\  See  Claim  of  Risht,  after  the  Revolution  ^n  1688. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy.  25 1 

Jtiad  been  written  at  the  earnest  request  of  the  assemblv  at 
Westminster,  and  especially  of  the  Scots ;  when  thenr 
jigents  in  Paris  saw  this  conclusion  of  Mr.  Blondel's  mar 
nuscript,  they  expostulated  with  him  very  loudly,  for  mar- 
ting  all  the  good  he  had  done  in  his  book,  disappointing 
the  expectation  of  the  assembly,  and  showing  himself  au 
enemy,  instead  of  a  friend,  to  their  holy  covenant ;  this 
they  urged  upon  liim  with  such  vehemency,  and  unwearied 
importunity,  that  they  prevailed  with  him  to  put  out  that 
conclusion.""^  His  intention  however  of  admitting  it,  suf* 
ficiently  shows  what  his  sentiments  were  on  this  subject^ 
smd  how  far  he  was  from  abetting  or  approving  those  vie-* 
knt  measures,  which  were  then  in  agitation  for  overturning 
that  ancient  and  apostolic  constitution  of  the  church,  which 
he  wished  to  see  carefully  preserv^ed,  wherever  it  had  been 
regularly  established. 

We  shall  only  take  notice  of  another  testimony,  given  by 
a  divine  of  the  presbyterian  establishment  in  Holland,  who 
could  not  be  suspected  of  any  prejudice  in  favour  of  Epis* 
copacy.  This  is  the  celebrated  Mr.  LeClerc,  whose  words, 
as  quoted  by  the  present  bishop  of  Lincoln,  are  these — "  I 
have  always  professed  to  believe,  that  Episcopacy  is  of 
•apostolical  institution,  and  consequently  very  good,  and 
veiy  lawful ;  that  man  had  no  manner  of  right  to  change  it 
in  any  place,  unless  it  was  impossible  otherwise  to  reform 
the  abuses  that  crept  into  Christianity  ;  that  it  was  justly 
preserved  in  England,  where  the  reformation  was  practi- 
cable without  altering  it ;  that,  therefore,  the  protestants  in 
England,  and  other  places,  where  there  are  bishops,  do  very 
ill  to  separate  from  that  discipline  ;  that  they  would  still  do 
much  worse  in  attempting  to  destroy  it,  in  order  to  set  up 
presbytery,  fanaticism  and  anarchy.    Things  ought  not  to 

*  This  important  piece  of  information  is  given  at  full  length  in  a  let- 
ter from  Dr.  P.  du  Moulin  to  Dr.  Durell,  and  published  in  the  Appendix 
to  his  Vievi  of  the  Government  and  Public  Worship  (^  God  in  the  reformed 
Churches  beyond  the  Seas,  p.  339,  340. 


052  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy. 

be  turned  into  a  chaos,  nor  people  seen  every  where  with- 
out a  call,  and  without  learning  pretending  to  inspiration. 
Nothing  is  more  proper  to  prevent  them  than  the  Episcopal 
discipline,  as  by  law  established  in  England,  especially  when 
those  that  preside  in  church  government,  are  persons  of 
penetration,  sobriety  and  discretion."* — ^^Yet  this  same  Mr. 
L.e  Clerc  exhibits  a  strong  proof  of  the  inconsistency  of  those 
winters  on  this  subject  who,  if  they  do  not  halt  between  two 
opinions,  seem  desirous  however  to  keep  weU  with  both 
sides ;  for,  arguing  in  another  part  of  his  works,  against 
the  necessity  of  Episcopal  government,  he  tells  us—"  It  is 
nothing  to  the  purpose  to  show,  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
instituted  this  form  of  church  government,  and  that  the 
church  never  had  any  other  kind  of  government  in  it  for 
above  fifteen  hundred  years  from  our  Saviour's  days  down- 
wards, which,  though  it  be  so  clearly  evidenced,  that  the 
truth  of  it  cannot  be  denied,  yet  it  is  of  no  weight,  nor  de- 
serves to  be  regarded.  For  those,  who  would  make  the 
hierarchy  necessary  to  the  constitution  of  the  Christian 
church,  ought  to  prove,  that  God  instituted  Christianity 
for  the  sake  of  the  Episcopal  order,  and  that  the  Episcopal 
order  was  not  instituted  for  the  sake  of  Christianity. — For 
if  this  order  was  appointed  for  the  sake  of  the  church 
(which  they  cannot  deny)  they  must  also  acknowledge,' 
that  if  it  be  more  advantageous  to  the  church  in  some 
places,  to  have  this  order  abolished,  it  is  not  amiss  to  lay 
it  aside  in  such  places."t 

Now,  this  is  an  argument  for  abolishing  the  Episcopal 
order,  which,  if  carried  to  its  full  extent,  will  equally  serve 
to  prove  the  lawfulness  or  even  expediency  of  laying  aside 
every  '^  outward  and  visible  sign"  in  religion,  nay,  even  the 
scriptures  themselves ;  since  it  may  justly  enough  be  said« 

•  See  Bishop  Pretyman's  Elements  of  Christian  Theology,  vol.  ii.  p. 
400,  401. 

t  Bibliotheque,  torn.  ix.  p.  159,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Brett  in  bis  Accoim 
pf  Church  Government,  ijfc  p.  Ill,  1X2. 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacyb  253 

that  Christianity  was  not  instituted  for  the  sake  of  the  scrip*^^^ 
tures,  but  the  scriptures  were  written  for  the  sake  of  Chris- 
tianity, that  the  church  might  have  a  certain  rule  to  walk 
by;  and  therefore,  when  any  church  judges  it  more  advan- 
tageous to  be  without  the  use  of  the  scriptures,  there  is  no- 
thing amiss  in  laying  it  aside,  as  the  church  of  Rome  has 
done,  for  what  she  is  pleased  to  think  the  greater  benefit 
of  Christianity.  By  the  same  reasoning,  the  two  sacra- 
ments of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper,  being  instituted 
for  the  sake  of  Christianity,  and  as  outward  means  of  con-^ 
veying  an  inward  grace,  they  too  may  safely  enough  be 
laid  aside,  when  any  body  of  pretended  Christians  shall  feel 
themselves  so  inwardly  moved  by  the  spirit,  as  to  stand  in 
no  need  of  such  outward  means  of  obtaining  its  grace  and 
influence  ;  and  the  church  of  Rome  is  the  less  to  be  blamed 
for  taking  away  the  cup  from  the  laity,  since,  according  to 
Le  Clerc's  argument,  she  might  have  deprived  them  of  the 
whole  sacrament,  had  she  thought  it  more  for  the  advantage 
of  the  church  so  to  do. 

These  are  modes  of  reasoning,  to  which,  as  advocates  for 
the  truth  as  it  is  in  Christ,  we  can  never  be  obliged  to  have 
recourse.  We  know,  that  the  holy  scriptures,  and  the  sacred 
institutions  of  Christianity,  were  designed  by  its  blessed 
Founder  to  be  continued  in  his  church,  even  unto  the  end 
of  the  world  ;  and,  therefore,  neither  the  church  of  Rome, 
nor  any  other  church,  cian  ever  set  aside  the  use  of  the 
scriptures,  or  the  ministration  of  the  sacraments,  whole 
and  entire,  as  they  were  instituted  by  Christ  himself:  And 
we  see  no  reason  why  the  same  may  not  be  said  of  the 
Episcopal  government  of  the  church,  which,  being  ap- 
pointed by  Christ  himself,  who  had  all  power  given  him  in 
heaven  and  earth  for  that  purpose,  cannot  be  set  aside  by 
any  human  authority,  or  on  any  pretence  whatever.  We 
do  not  say  that  Christianity  was  instituted  for  the  sake  of 
the  outward  polity  of  the  church,  or  the  church  for  the 
s^ke  of  the  Episcopal  order ;  btit  we  may  justly  say,  what 


2^4  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy* 

is  plainly  said  in  scripture,  and  was  constantly  professed  m 
the  purest  ages  of  the  gospel,  that  the  helief  of  the  "  holy 
catholic  church,"  being  a  part  of  the  faith  which  Chris* 
tianity  requires,  and  the  Episcopal  order  a  part  of  what 
we  are  taught  to  believe,  concerning  the  constitution  and 
government  of  the  church,  no  separation  must  be  attempted 
of  what  our  God  and  Saviour  has  thus  joined  together. 
We  must  receive  his  scheme  of  salvation  according  to  the 
plan  and  the  terms  on  which  he  has  offered  it  to  us ;  and 
notwithstanding  all  that  Mr.  Le  Clerc  and  other  writers  of 
the  same  stamp  have  affirmed  to  the  contrar}^,  we  must 
conclude,  that  the  necessity  of  Episcopal  government  is 
most  undeniably  proved,  when  we  show  that  it  was  insti- 
tuted by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  and  continued  to  be  the 
only  form  of  church  government  for  fifteen  hundred  years 
and  upwards. 

The  strength  of  the  arguments  which  we  have  now  beei* 
handling  in  defence  of  the  apostolic  Episcopacy,  lies  in  this 
undoubted  truth,  that  the  Christian  priesthood  is  a  divine 
positive  institution,  which,  as  it  could  have  no  beginning 
but  by  means  of  God's  appointment,  so  neither  could  it 
be  continued  but  in  the  way  which  he  had  been  pleased  to 
appoint  for  its  continuance.  The  apostolic  practice  plainly 
showed  what  the  method  was  which  God  had  chosen  for 
that  purpose :  For  Christ  was  in  all  that  the  apostles  did, 
and  God  was  "  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to  himself." 
The  ministr)^  of  this  reconciliation  was  con^mitted  to  the 
apostles  ;  and  we  have  seen  how  that  ministry  was  branched 
out  into  three  distinct  orders,  and  that  the  persons  severally 
invested  with  them,  towards  the  end  of  the  apostolic  age, 
were  distinguished  from  each  other  by  the  appropriate  titles 
of  bishop,  presbyter  and  deacoji :  A  distinction  which  evi- 
dently took  place  in  conformity  with  that  which  had  been 
establish  :d  in  the  Jewish  church,  of  high  priest,  priest  and 
Levite.  That  such  a  resemblance  would  appear  between 
the  Israebtish  and  Christian  economy^  may  be  justly  in- 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy,  ^5S 

ferred  from  this  consideration,  that  the  former  was  de- 
signed to  be  the  figure  and  forerunner  of  the  latter,  and 
that  the  author  of  both  was  the  same  all-wise  and  merciful 
God,  who  would  certainly  contrive  and  order  whatever  was 
best  for  answering  his  own  gracious  purposes.  This  was  a 
matter  which  could  only  be  settled  by  divine  wisdom  and 
goodness,  and,  therefore,  would  not  be  left  to  the  deter- 
mination of  human  prudence.  For  if  it  be  true,  as  Dr. 
Campbell  has  affirmed  it  to  be  "  certain,  that  one  model 
of  church  government  may  be  much  better  calculated  for 
promoting  the  belief  and  obedience  of  the  gospel  than 
another,"  we  may  as  certainly  conclude  that  such  a  model 
would  be  prescribed  by  the  divine  Founder  of  the  church, 
as  he  knew  to  be  best  calculated  for  promoting  the  ends  of 
infinite  mercy  and  goodness.  This  was  the  object  which 
he  had  in  view,  by  appointing  the  orders  of  the  ministry, 
and  regulating  the  whole  sacred  service  under  the  dispen- 
sation of  the  law ;  and  we  cannot  suppose  that  he  would 
leave  that  of  the  gospel  in  an  irregular  or  unsettled  condi- 
tion, and  not  make  sufficient  provision  for  the  permanent 
order  and  polity  of  that  church  which  he  came  in  person  to 
establish  and  to  build  on  such  a  rock,  as  that  the  gates  of 
hell  should  not  prevail  against  it.  To  say  then  "  xvithfree^ 
dom^''  as  our  Professor  does,  "  that  if  a  particular  form  of 
polity  had  been  essential  to  the  church,  it  had  been  laid 
down  in  another  manner  in  the  sacred  books,"^  is,  in  our 
opinion,  to  speak  with  more  freedom  than  is  becoming  on 
such  a  subject,  especially  when  any  person  may  see,  who 
is  not  blinded  by  prejudice,  that  there  is  "  a  particular  form 
of  polit)'  laid  down  in  the  sacred  books,"  both  in  what  our 
Lord  said  to  his  apostles,  and  in  what  they  did  in  conse- 
quence of  his  directions ;  and  all  this  laid  down,  if  not  in 
such  a  manner  as  Dr.  Campbell  would  have  dictated,  yet  so 
as  to  enable  the  primitive  church  perfectly  to  understand 

*=  Lecture  iv. 


256  General  Defence  of  Episcopacy 4     ■ 

the  plan,  and  continue  the  form  of  polity  which  the  apostles- 
had  begun,  and  which  form,  we  have  seen,  was  properly, 
and  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word,  Episcopal. 

If  Dr.  Campbell  did  not  see  this  in  the  same  light  with 
us,  and  was  disposed  to  put  a  different  construction  on 
what  is  laid  down  in  the  sacred  books,  we  can  only  regret 
this  circumstance,  as  an  additional  evidence  in  support  of 
his  own  observation,  "  that  even  good  and  learned  men  al- 
low their  judgments  to  be  warped  by  the  sentiments  and 
custom  of  the  sect  which  they  prefer ;  and  the  true  partizan 
of  whatever  denomination,  always  inclines  to  correct  the 
diction  of  the  spirit  by  that  of  the  party."*  Foreseeing, 
no  doubt,  that  this  would  be  more  particularly  the  case, 
in  the  article  of  church  government,  our  Lecturer  proposed 
an  appeal  to  those  early  writers,  who,  by  his  own  account, 
as  to  what  depends  on  testimony^  in  explaining  any  part  of 
scripture  which  is  thought  to  be  doubtful,  "  are  in  every 
case,  wherein  no  particular  passion  can  be  suspected  to 
have  swayed  them,  to  be  preferred  before  modem  inter- 
preters or  annotators."  Agreeing  very  cordially  with  him 
in  this  opinion,  respecting  the  testimony  of  the  fathers,  we 
have  listened  to  the  evidence  of  these  unexceptionable  wit- 
nesses, and  have  found  it,  from  the  general  and  uniform 
tenor  of  their  writings,  to  be  full  and  direct,  in  favour  of 
apostolic  Episcopacy,  as  the  invariable  form  of  govern- 
ment, which  had  obtained  in  the  Christian  church. — This 
was  a  matter  of  fact,  in  relation  to  which  their  testimony 
could  not  be  doubted ;  and  if  we  consider  the  nature  of  the 
thing,  it  was  surely  "  a  case,  wherein  no  particular  passion 
could  be  suspected  to  have  swayed  them."  The  apostolic 
institution  of  Episcopacy  was  a  truth  believed,  and  openly 
avowed,  at  a  time  when  no  worldly  temptation  could  have 
operated  in  producing  that  belief,  or  supporting  that  "  par- 
ticular form  of  ecclesiastic  polity."    There  was  no  room 

*  See  his  note  on  Mat.  iii.  11.— in  bis  Translation  of  the  Gospch, 


General  Defence  of  Episcopacy*  2S7 

£<5r  a  spirit  of  pride  or  ambition  to  exert  its  influence  on  the 
minds  of  Christian  pastors,  when  the  highest  office  in  the 
church,  so  far  from  securing  to  those  invested  with  it  any 
portion  of  worldly  honour,  or  legal  revenue,  served  only  to 
Expose  them  to  a  greater  degree  of  reproach  and  poverty. 
Hie  station  of  a  bishop  was  that  of  the  most  imminent  dan- 
ger; and  whoever  possessed  that  degree  of  zeal  and  firm- 
ness which  induced  him  to  accept  it,  was  almost  certain, 
as  soon  as  persecution  commenced,  to  fall  the  first  victim 
to  the  fury  of  his  enemies. 

While  the  Episcopal  character  was  thus  held  up,  as  the 
principal  mark  to  be  aimed  at  by  the  rage  of  heathen  op- 
pression, we  can  hardly  suppose  that  any  other  motive 
would  have  been  sufficient  to  the  undertaking  an  office  so 
peculiarly  encompassed  by  danger  and  difficulty,  but  the 
firm  conviction  of  its  being  absolutely  necessary  to  the 
maintenance  of  order  and  unity  in  the  church,  and  to  the 
preservation  of  that  apostolic  commission,  from  which  must 
be  derived,  by  regular  succession,  all  the  right  that  any 
man  can  have  to  minister  in  holy  things.  The  form  of  this 
ministry,  and  the  several  degrees  of  office  by  which  it  has 
been  always  distinguished,  we  have  now  fully  considered  ; 
and  by  every  argument  adapted  to  the  subject,  we  have  seen 
it  clearly  evinced,  that  the  constitution  of  the  church,  as 
established  by  its  divine  Founder,  and  given  in  charge  to 
his  chosen  apostles,  was  by  them  transmitted  to  their 
several  successors,  and  so  handed  down  through  the  pri- 
mitive ages  as  a  regular  diocesan  Episcopacy.  This  is  the 
plain  and  important  fact,  which  we  have  been  endeavouring 
to  establish  as  the  second  part  of  our  plan,  with  all  the  ori- 
ginal evidence  in  its  favour,  which  could  be  required  from 
scripture,  and  all  the  additional  testimony  which  has  since 
been  affiDrded  to  its  support,  by  "  ANTIQUITY,  UNI- 
VERSALITY and  CONSENT."  We  may  therefore  be 
allowed  to  recommend,  as  a  matter  of  undoubted  certainty, 
and  worthy  of  the  most  serious  consideration,  what  was 

33 


258  Genera!  Defince  of  Episcopacy i 

proposed  as  the  title  of  this  chapter — "  That  the  church  of 
Christ,  in  which  his  religion  is  received  and  embraced,  is 
that  spiritual  society  in  which  the  ministration  of  holy  things 
is  committed  to  the  three  distinct  orders  of  bishops,  pres- 
byters, and  deacons,  deriving  their  authority  from  the 
aposdes,  as  those  apostles  received  their  commission  from 
Christ*" 


(    259    ) 


CHAPTER  HI. 

'^'Part  of  this  Holy^  Catholic^  and  Apostolic  Churchy  though 
deprived  of  the  Support  of  Civil  Establishment^  does  still 
exist  in  this  Country^  under  the  Name  of  the  Scotch  Epis- 
copal Church,  whose  Doctrine^  Discipline^  and  Worships 
as  happily  agreeing  with  that  of  the  first  and  purest  Ages 
of  Christianity^  ought  to  he  steadily  adhered  to  by  all  who 
profess  to  be  of  the  Episcopal  Communion^  in  this  Part 
of  the  Kingdom. 

It  is  a  well  known  fact,  that  in  all  the  nations  of  the 
world,  where  any  sense  of  a  God  or  religion  has  been  pre- 
served, certain  persons  have  always  been  set  apart,  as  the 
more  immediate  servants  of  that  God,  and  for  performing 
the  more  solemn  oJSices  of  his  religion.  The  sacred  function 
appropriated  to  these  persons  has,  for  the  same  reason,  been 
ever  considered  as  a  divine  and  most  salutary  institution. 
This  much  may  be  gathered  even  from  the  dark  records 
.  of  heathen  antiquity.  But,  if,  wishing  for  clearer  informa- 
tion than  these  can  afford,  we  consult  the  sacred  history. 
We  shall  find  this  matter  set  in  a  just  and  true  light.  The 
nature  of  the  priesthood  is  there  laid  down  in  the  plainest 
manner,  the  design  of  it  fully  explained,  and  its  authority- 
placed  on  the  onl}'  proper  foundation.  The  mediation  of  a 
Redeemer,  as  absolutely  necessary  to  the  salvation  of 
mankind,  is  there  held  forth  as  the  source  of  that  typical 
priesthood,  and  those  figurative  sacrifices,  which  the  law  of 
God  appointed  and  required,  in  all  that  period  which  pre- 
ceded the  incarnation  of  the  promised  Saviour. — It  was 
from  their  relation  to  him,  and  dependence  on  him,  that  both 
priests  and  sacrifices  derived  all  their  honour  and  efficacy ; 
And  when  at  last  this  ^glorious  Intercessor  "  appeared  upon 


260    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

earth,  to  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself,"  we  are 
assured,  that  "  he  did  not  glorify  himself  to  be  made  an 
High  Priest,  but  received  this  honour  from  his  Father  that 
sent  him,  and  was  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron."*  In 
conse  [uence  of  this  high  and  heavenly  commission,  he 
Stood  forth  as  the  great  High  Priest  of  our  profession, 
and  having  purchased  his  church  with  his  own  blood,  he 
not  only  "  died,  but  rose  again,  that  he  might  be  Lord  both 
of  the  dead  and  of  the  living."  It  was,  therefore,  after  his 
resurrection  that  he  was  heard  to  declare,  that  "  all  power 
was  given  unto  him  in  heaven  and  in  earth ;"  and  with  this 
declaration  he  introduced  the  commission  which  he  then 
gave  his  apostles,  delegating  to  them  such  a  portion  of  his 
power  as  was  necessary  for  authorizing  them  to  convert  the 
nations  to  his  faith,  and  teach  them  to  observe  whatever  he 
had  commanded,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  From 
the  extent  of  time  allotted  to  the  execution  of  this  commis- 
sion, we  may  see,  it  was  impossible  for  the  apostles  to  ex- 
ecute it  fully,  and  to  that  extent^  in  their  own  persons,  or 
in  any  other  way,  than  by  doing  what  they  could  them- 
selves, and  transmitting  to  others  the  same  charge,  which 
they  had  received,  that  so  a  succession  of  such  commis- 
sioned officers  might  be  continued  in  the  church,  to  the 
end  of  time. 

The  manner  in  which  this  succession  has  been  carried 
on,  and  the  certainty  of  its  having  met  with  no  breach  or 
interruption,  from  the  days  of  the  apostles  to  the  present 
time,  have  both,  we  presume,  been  sufficiently  established 
in  the  preceding  chapter,  which  has  also  exhibited  the  most 
ample  and  satisfactory  evidence,  to  prove  the  apostolic  in- 
stitution of  the  three  distinct  orders  of  bishops,  presby- 
ters, and  deacons,  to  whom  the  Christian  ministry  was 
originally  committed,  and  by  whom,  according  to  their 
several  degrees  of  office,  it  has  always  been  exercised  in 

*  Hcb.  V.  4,  5. 


jPtirticular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland*    261 

every  sound  and  regular  part  of  the    Christian  church. 
Those  who  have  opposed  this  form  of  ecclesiastical  polity, 
have  often  been  challenged  to  produce  evidence  of  any  na- 
tional or  provincial  church,  existing  without  it,  for  fifteen 
hundred  years  after  the  first  publication  of  the  Christian 
faith.     The  corruptions,  which,  for  a  great  part  of  that 
period,  unhappily  prevailed  in  the  Western  nations,  did 
not,  and  could  not  affect  the  validity  of  the  apostolic  com- 
mission, or  put  an  end  to  the  ministerial  power,  which  it 
was  designed  to  convey.     The  church  of  Rome,  with  all 
the  errors  and  abuses  cleaving  to  it,  which  made  the  re- 
formation necessary,  did  not  cease  to  be  a  church,  any  more 
than  a  man,  whose  soul  is  corrupted  by  vice,  and  his  body 
marred  by  disease,  ceases  to  be  a  man,  while  his  soul  and 
body  continue  united.     It  often  happened  that  the  Jew- 
ish church  was  sadly  infected  with  idolatr)',  and  addicted 
to  many  enormities,  which  provoked  to  anger  the  Lord 
their  God ;  yet  they  still  continued  a  visible  church  upon 
earth,  till  he  at  last  thought  proper  to  remove  their  candle- 
stick, and  allowed  "  the  Romans  to  come  and  take  away 
their  place  and  nation."    Though  he  frequently  raised  up 
prophets  to  warn  them  of  their  danger,  and  call  them  to 
repentance,  yet  he  never  instituted  a  new  order  of  priests, 
nor  authorized  any  but  the  sons  of  Aaron,  to  appear  in 
his  holy  place,  and  offer  the  sacrifices  prescribed  by  the 
law.     Their  corruptions  did  not  divest  them  of  the  priest- 
hood, nor  make  any  breach  in  the  order  of  succession,  till 
k  was  completely  taken  away,  and  their  whole  economy 
dissolved.     And  so  the  church  of  Rome,  while  permitted 
to  retain  a  succession  of  the  Christian  priesthood,  by  its 
preservation  of  the  Episcopal  order,  must  also  have  the 
power  of  conferring  that  order,  although  it  could  have  no 
power  to  prevent  those  who  had  thus  received  their  Epis-^ 
copal  succession,  from  doing  all  they  could  to  reform  the 
abuses,  which  had  gradually  crept  into  that  degenerate  part 
of  the  Christian  church. 


262    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

This  is  all  that  can  properly  be  meant  by  the  term  re- 
fortnation^  which  does  not  lead  to  the  idea  of  making  a 
new  church,  a  thing  we  can  no  more  do  than  make  a  new 
bible,  but  only  to  that  of  correcting  and  amending  the  old 
one,  and  so  replacing  it  in  a  state  of  conformity  to  the  ori- 
ginal standard.  But  the  succession  of  pastors  in  the  three 
sacred  orders  of  bishops,  presbyters  and  deacons,  was  none 
of  the  inventions  of  popery.  It  was  the  continuance  of  an 
apostolic  institution,  which  had  spread  itself  over  the  w^hole 
Christian  world,  even  to  this  remote  island  of  Britain,  long 
before  the  corrupting  influence  of  the  church  of  Rome  had 
obtained  any  footing  in  it. — When  Augustin  the  Monk  was 
sent  over  by  Pope  Gregory  to  convert  the  Saxon  invaders; 
he  found  an  Episcopal  church  in  Britain,  regularly  consti- 
tuted according  to  the  primitive  model.  And  when,  many 
centuries  after,  the  church  of  England  came  at  last  to  en-, 
gage  in  the  happy  work  of  reformation,  which  she  did  most 
seriously  and  successfully,  she  only  returned  to  the  exercise 
of  her  original  rights,  as  an  independent  national  church. 
It  was  on  this  footing  that  she  threw  off  the  yoke,  under 
which  she  had  so  long  bowed  to  the  papal  tyranny.  But 
when  she  thus  separated  from  the  corruptions  of  Rome,  she 
did  not  also  throw  off  a  just  regard  to  the  doctrines  and  in^ 
stitutions  of  the  church  of  Christ. — Her  reformed  bishops 
saw^  the  necessity  of  continuing  that  Episcopal  ordination 
which  they  themselves  had  duly  received :  And  Archbi- 
shop Parker  having  been  regularly  consecrated  by  four  of 
these  bishops,  on  the  17th  of  December,  1559,  and  placed 
by  Queen  Elizabeth  in  the  see  of  Canterbury,  the  public  re- 
gisters will  show  not  only  the  year,  month  and  day  when, 
but  also  the  persons  by  whom,  every  particular  bishop  has 
been  consecrated,  from  that  period  to  the  present  time. 

Such  is  the  regular  manner  in  which  the  Episcopal  suc- 
cession has  been  canonically  carried  on,  and  can  be  clearly 
traced,  in  the  church  of  England:  And  it  is  also  well 
known,  that  on  two  remarkable  occasions,  has  that  church 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    263 

contributed  her  friendly  aid  to  preserv^e  the  same  succession 
in  her  sister-church  of  Scodand.  After  the  reforming  party 
in  this  country  had  gone  on  for  a  course  of  years,  with 
much  noise  and  tumult,  establishing  and  altering  their  va- 
rious plans  of  church  government,  King  James,  at  last,  hav- 
ing succeeded  to  the  crown  of  England,  was  enabled  to  put 
matters  on  a  more  decent  and  regular  footing.  For  that 
purpose,  having  desired  three  of  those  persons  who  had 
been  nominated  to  bishopricks  in  Scotland,  to  repair  to 
London,  he  told  them  at  their  first  audience,  "  that  he  had 
with  great  charge  recovered  the  temporalities  of  the  church 
out  of  lay  hands,  and  bestowed  them,  as  he  hoped,  upon 
worthy  persons  ;  but  as  he  could  not  make  them  bishops, 
nor  could  they  assume  that  honour  to  themseleves,  he  had 
therefore  called  them  to  England,  to  receive  regular  conse- 
cration from  the  bishops  there,  that  on  their  return  home, 
they  might  communicate  the  same  to  the  rest,  and  thereby 
stop  the  mouths  of  adversaries  of  all  denominations."^ 
These  three  persons  were  accordingly  consecrated  on  the 
31st  of  October,  1610,  by  the  bishops  of  London,  Ely  and 
Bath ;  and  on  their  return  to  Scotland,  communicated  the 
Episcopal  powers  which  they  had  now  received  in  a  right 
and  canonical  manner,  to  their  former  titular  brethren  ;  by 
which  means  a  regular  Episcopacy  was  introduced  into  the 
reformed  church  of  Scotland,  and  continued  to  enjoy  the 
sanction  of  legal  establishment,  till  the  troubles  broke  out 
in  the  reign  of  Charles  the  First,  when  the  church  was 
again  thrown  into  the  utmost  confusion,  atid  a  "  solemn 
league  and  covenanf  was  entered  into  for  effecting  the  en- 
tire extirpation  of  "  prelacy,  or  the  government  of  the 
church  by  archbishops  and  bishops,  and  all  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal officers  depending  on  that  hierarchy." 

Things  continued  in  this  disordered  and  ruinous  state, 
till  the  restoration  of  Charles  the  Second  ;  on  which  happy 

*  See  Skinner's  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p.  251. 


264    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScoiiand. 

event,  the  Church  of  England  immediately  revived,  and 
showed  herself  worthy  of  the  distinguished  place  she  had 
always  held  among  the  reformed  churches.  Her  esta- 
blished rank  and  splendour  were  restored  to  her.  Nine  of 
her  bishops  had  survived  the  late  calamities,  of  whom  the 
worthy  bishop  of  London,  Dr.  Juxon,  who  had  attended 
his  dying  sovereign  on  the  scaffold,  was  promoted  to  the 
see  of  Canterbury.  The  other  eight  took  possession  of 
their  former  bishopricks,  and  the  rest  of  the  sees  that  had 
been  vacant,  were  soon  filled  with  learned  and  able  pre- 
lates. A  similar  resolution  was  adopted  by  government, 
with  regard  to  Scotland  ;  but  before  Episcopacy  could  be 
restored  in  this  country,  the  necessity  of  the  case  required 
that  application  should  again  be  made  to  the  English 
church  for  assistance.  The  Scottish  bishops,  who  had  been 
driven  into  exile  by  the  violence  of  the  times,  had  all  died, 
except  one,  without  being  able  to  provide  for  the  Episcopal 
succession.  It  was  therefore  determined,  by  those  who 
had  the  object  at  heart,  that  this  necessary  provision  should 
be  made,  by  having  recourse  to  the  same  expedient  which 
had  been  adopted  about  fifty  years  before ;  and,  accordingly 
four  of  the  persons  who  had  been  nominated  for  the  Scot- 
tish Episcopate,  were  consecrated  at  London,  on  the  15th 
of  December,   1661,  by  four  of  the   English  bishops.* 

*  In  the  year  1789,  Bishop  Abernethy  Drummond,  Bishop  Strachan, 
and  I,  being  at  London,  soliciting  relief  to  our  church  from  certain 
penal  statutes  ;  at  the  desire  of  Bishop  Seabury,  of  Connecticut,  who 
some  years  before  had  been  consecrated  by  the  bishops  in  Scotland,  we 
applied  to  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  for  an  attested  extract  of  the 
consecration  of  the  Scotch  bishops  in  1661,  and  through  his  Grace's  con- 
descending attention,  received  what  follows — 

"  Extract  from  the  Register-book  of  Archbishop  Juxon,  in  the  library 

of  his  Grace,  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  at  Lambeth  palace" — 

Fol.  237. 

**  It  appears — that  James  Sharpe  was  consecrated  archbishop  of  St, 

Andrews,    Andrew  FairfuU  archbishop  of  Glasgow,    Robert  Leighton 

bishop  of  Dunblenen,  and  James  Hamilton  bishop  of  Galloway,  on  the 

15ih  day  of  December,  1661,  in  St.  Peter's  church,  Westminster,  by 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    265 

But  neither  on  this,  nor  on  the  former  occasion,  did  anv  of 
the  two  archbishops  officiate  ;  lest  their  presiding  at  the 
consecration  should  have  been  considered  as  claiming  from 
the  church  of  Scotland,  the  acknowledgment  of  any  sub- 
jection to  the  metropolitical  sees  of  Canterbury  or  York. 
On  returning  to  Scotland  the  four  newly  consecrated  pre- 
lates took  possession  of  the  several  sees  to  which  they  had 
been  appointed,  and  the  other  ten  bishopricks  were  after- 
wards conferred  on  the  persons,  who  for  that  purpose  had 
received  consecration  from  their  hands. 

Thus  was  Episcopacy  once  more  restored  in  Scotland, 
and  continued  to  be  the  established  form  of  church  govern- 
ment, till  the  revolution  took  place  in  1688,  when  the  bi- 
shops unanimously  refusing  to  comply  with  that  change, 
and  to  renounce  the  allegiance  which  they  had  sworn  to 
King  James,  were  obliged  to  suffer  the  consequences  of 
such  refusal ;  and  however  imprudent  their  conduct  may 
appear  in  a  worldly  view,  it  is  evident,  from  the  sacrifices 
which  they  made,  that  they  acted  with  integrity,  and  from 
the  most  disinterested  and  conscientious  motives.  But  whe- 
ther it  was  owing  to  the  offensive  principles  maintained  by 
the  bishops  and  their  followers,  or  rather  to  that  article  in 
,the  Claim  of  Right  set  up  by  the  convention  of  the  estates  of 
Scotland,  which  declared  "  prelacy^  or  any  sort  of  Episco- 
pal superiority^  to  be  a  great  and  insupportable  grievance 
and  trouble  to  this  nation  ;" — whichever  of  these  causes 
operated  most  powerfully  in  producing  the  designed  effect, 
so  it  was,  that  the  same  convention,  having  been  turned 
into  a  parliament,  passed  an  act  on  the  22d  of  July,  1689, 
for  "  abolishing  prelacy,  and  all  superiority  of  any  office  in 
the  church  of  this  kingdom  above  presbyters." — In  conse- 

Gilbert,  bishop  of  London,  commissary  to  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
and  that  the  Right  Rev.  George,  bishop  of  Worcester,  John,  bishop  of 
Carlisle,  and  Hugh,  bishop  of  Landaff,  were  present  and  assisting. 

"  Extracted  this  3d  day  of  June,  1789,  by  me,  William  Dickes,  Se- 
cretary." 

34 


266    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland* 

quence  of  this  abolition,  which  was  followed,  the  year  after, 
by  the  establishment  of  the  presbyterian  form  of  church 
government,  the  bishops  were  deprived  of  every  thing 
connected  with  their  office,  which  the  civil  power  could 
take  from  them.  They  lost  their  revenues,  and  temporal 
jurisdiction  ;  but  their  spiritual  authority  still  remained, 
and  that  "  gift  of  God,"  which  they  had  received  by  the 
imposition  of  Episcopal  hands,  they  considered  themselves 
bound  to  exercise  for  promoting  that  Episcopal  "  work  in 
the  church  of  God,  which  had  been  committed  to  them.'' 
By  virtue  of  this  commission,  they  continued,  in  a  quiet 
and  peaceable  manner,  to  discharge  the  duties  of  their 
spiritual  function.  They  ordained  ministers  for  such 
vacant  congregations  as  adhered  to  their  communion  ;  and 
when  they  saw  it  necessary  to  attend  to  the  preservation  of 
their  own  order,  they  proceeded  to  the  consecration  of  such 
persons  as  were  thought  most  proper  for  being  invested 
with  that  sacred  and  important  trust.— -We  have  also  to 
observe,  that  all  the  ordinations  and  consecrations  which 
have  taken  place  in  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church,  since  the 
sera  of  the  revolution,  have  been  and  still  are  invariably 
performed,  as  we  have  reason  to  believe  they  were  from 
the  Restoration  to  that  period,  according  to  the  ''  form  and 
manner  of  ordaining  and  consecrating"  prescribed  by  the 
church  of  England.  All  this  having  been  duly  attended 
to,  by  the  prelates  who  were  ejected  from  their  sees  at  the 
revolution,  and  by  those  whom  they  and  their  successors 
promoted  to  the  order  of  bishops,  it  is  evident  that  eveiy 
thing  has  been  done,  which  could  be  deemed  necessary  for 
preserving  a  regular  Episcopal  succession  in  Scotland  ;  as 
may  be  seen  from  a  list  of  the  consecrations  of  Scotch  bi- 
shops from  the  revolution  to  the  present  time,  which  is 
subjoined  in  an  appendix  to  this  work.^ 
It  was,  no  doubt,  from  his  knowledge  of  these  matters, 

*  See  Appendix,  No.  I 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    267 

and  of  the  care  which  has  been  taken  to  sup  ort  an  Episco- 
pal church  in  this  part  of  the  kingdom,  though  deprived  of 
the  aid  of  civil  establishment,  that  Dr.  Campbell  was  led  td 
introduce  one  of  his  Lectures^  on  Ecclesiastical  History^  by 
observing,  that  he  should  not  have  thought  it  necessary  "  to 
be  so  particular  as  he  had  been,  in  ascertaining  the  nature 
of  that  polity  which  obtained  in  the  primitive  church,  were 
not  this  a  matter  that  is  made  a  principal  foundation  of  dis- 
sent by  a  pretty  numerous  sect  in  this  country :"  by  which 
sect^  it  is  plain  that  he  means  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church, 
from  what  immediately  follows. — "  I  do  not,"  he  says, 
*'  here  allude  to  those  amongst  us,  who  barely  prefer  the 
Episcopal  form  of  government,  whom,  in  general,  as  far  as 
I  have  had  occasion  to  know  them,  I  have  found  moderate 
and  reasonable  in  their  sentiments  on  this  subject.  Such  do 
not  pretend  that  the  external  model  of  the  church  (what- 
ever they  may  think  of  the  antiquity  of  theirs)  is  of  the 
essence  of  religion." 

If  by  thus  making  a  distinction  between  the  two  Episco- 
pal "  sects*''  in  this  country,  our  Professor  meant  to  pay  a 
compliment  to  the  one  at  the  expense  of  the  other,  it  does 
not  appear  that  the  peculiarity  of  sentiment,  which  he  has 
•held  forth  as  the  mark  of  distinction,  was  the  most  proper 
for  answering  his  purpose.  It  is  generally  thought,  that  the 
"  foundation  of  dissent"  from  that  which,  in  any  country, 
is  by  law  established,  ought  to  be  laid  in  something  that  "  is 
of  the  essence  of  religion,"  or  at  least  supposed  to  be  so  by 
the  dissenting  party.  And  such  is  our  opinion  of  the  neces- 
sity of  maintaining  unity  and  concord  among  all  "  who  pro- 
fess and  call  themselves  Christians,"  that  we  should  hold 
ourselves  highly  culpable  in  keeping  up  a  separate  commu- 
nion from  that  which  has  the  law  of  our  country  on  its 
side,  were  it  not  for  the  sake  of  things  which  we  believe  to 
be  essential  to  our  religion,  and  a  part  of  that  apostolic  doc- 

*  See  Lecture  viii. 


268    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

trine,  to  which,  as  Christians,  we  must  steadfastly  adhere* 
If  there  be  any  amongst  us,  as  it  seems  Dr.  Campbell  had 
*'  occasion  to  know,  who  barely  prefer  the  Episcopal  form 
of  government,"  on  account  perhaps  of  its  antiquity,  but 
without  considering  it  as  at  all  necessary  to  the  being  of  a 
church ;  whatever  may  be  said  of  such  people's  moderation^ 
we  see  no  ground  for  distinguishing  them  as  "  reasonable 
in  their  sentiments,"  if  they  had  no  better  reason  to  justify 
their  separation  from  the  establishment  of  their  country, 
and  no  other  benefit  from  the  Episcopal  form  of  govern- 
ment^ but  what  arises  from  the  ministrations  of  clergy,  who 
have  been  Episcopally  ordained,  but  otherwise  acknowledge 
no  such  government.  The  reflection,  therefore,  which,  it 
would  seem.  Dr.  Campbell  was  desirous  to  cast  on  one  of 
the  Episcopal  "  sects"  in  this  country,  will  be  found  more 
applicable  to  the  sentiments  which  he  has  ascribed  to  the 
other,  and  by  marking  which  as  "  moderate  and  reasonable," 
he,  no  doubt,  intended  to  keep  up  that  unnecessary  distinc- 
tion between  the  Scotch  and  English  Episcopacy,  which 
has  already  subsisted  too  long,  but  ought  to  afford  no  more 
room  for  such  disagreeable  and  unworthy  comparisons. 

All  this,  however,  and  more  of  the  same  kind,  of  which 
we  have  been  obliged  to  take  some  notice,  appears  but  as 
slight  skirmishing,  when  compared  to  the  grand  battery, 
which  was  at  last  to  be  opened  against  the  shattered  but 
venerable  remains  of  the  old  Episcopal  church  of  Scotland. 
We  had  seen  preparations  making  for  this  hostile  attack, 
in  the  beginning  .of  our  Professor'*  Eleventh  Lecture^  where, 
after  some  general  remarks  to  show,  in  his  way,  that  the 
terms  ordination  and  appointment  to  a  particular  pastoral 
charge^  were  at  first  perfectly  synonymous,  he  adds,  "  If 
one,  however,  in  those  truly  primitive  times,  (which  but 
rarely  happened),  found  it  necessary  to  retire  from  the 
work,  he  never  thought  of  retaining  either  the  title  or  the 
emoluments. — To  be  made  a  bishop,  and  in  being  so,  to 
receive  no  charge  whatever,  to  have  no  work  to  execute, 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    269 

could  have  been  regarded  no  otherwise,  than  as  a  contra- 
diction in  terms.  Indeed,  the  name  of  the  office  implied 
the  service,  without  which  it  could  not  subsist,  that  is, 
without  which  there  was  no  office.  The  name  bishop 
means  overseer,  and  this  is  a  term  manifestly  correlative 
to  that  which  expresses  the  thing  to  be  overseen.  The 
connection  is  equally  necessary  and  essential  as  between 
father  and  child,  sovereign  and  subject,  husband  and  wife. 
The  one  is  inconceivable  without  the  other.  Ye  cannot 
make  a  man  an  overseer,  to  whom  ye  give  no  oversight, 
no  more  than  ye  can  make  a  man  a  shepherd,  to  whom  ye 
give  the  charge  of  no  sheep,  or  a  husband,  to  whom  ye 
give  no  wife.  Nay,  in  fact,  as  a  man  ceases  to  be  a  hus- 
band the  moment  he  ceases  to  have  a  wife,  and  is  no 
longer  a  shepherd  than  he  has  the  care  of  sheep,  so  in  the 
only  proper  and  original  import  of  the  words,  a  bishop 
continues  a  bishop  only  whilst  he  continues  to  have  people 
uiider  his  spiritual  care."* 

These  are  the  general  principles  which  our  Lecturer  laid 
down,  as  the  ground  of  a  long  satyrical  strain  of  declama- 
tion, for  it  can  hardly  be  called  reasoning,  against  the 
Episcopal  succession  in  Scotland;  that  regular  and  orderly 
succession,  for  the  validity  of  which  we  have  appealed  to 
undoubted  vouchers,  those  ecclesiastical  registers,  which 
can  at  any  time  be  shown  for  the  satisfaction  of  all  con- 
cerned. But  before  we  come  to  consider  the  particular 
application,  which  our  Professor  has  made  of  these  his 
"  self-evident  propositions,"  to  the  case  of  what  he  calls-^ 
''  the  Scotch  Episcopal  party,"  let  us  inquire  a  little  into 
the  foundation  of  his  supposed  analogies,  and  see  what 
would  be  the  consequence  of  those  ieferences,  which  he 
intended  should  be  drawn  from  them.  The  most  likely 
one  of  any  to  be  admitted  as  a  parallel  case  to  the  connec- 
tion between  a  bishop  and  his  spiritual  charge,  is  that  which 

*  Lecture  xi. 


270    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

subsists  between  "  sovereign  and  subject,"  the  connection 
in  both  cases  arising  from  appointment  to  an  office,  although 
it  must  be  owned,  that  the  mode  of  appointment  is  very- 
different,  as  well  as  the  object  about  which  each  of  these 
offices  is  exercised.  Our  Lecturer,  however,  was  fond  of 
this  allusion — -and  asked—"  For  example,  what  would  one 
think  of  the  pretext  of  making  a  man  a  king,  without  giv- 
ing him  either  subjects  or  a  kingdom  ?"^  We  should  cer- 
tainly think  the  pretext  very  foolish,  and  the  thing  itself  as 
unlikely  to  happen  :  Since  these  king-makers,  a  privilege 
which  some  people  are  always  glad  to  keep  in  view,  might 
themselves  become  the  subjects,  and  their  lands  would  of 
course  be  the  kingdom. — But  the  Doctor  adds — "  Ye  will 
say,  may  not  the  right  to  a  kingdom  be  confen^ed  on  a  man, 
whom  we  cannot  put  in  possession  V  This  he  readily 
admits,  but  insists  that  it  "  is  not  parallel  to  the  case  in 
hand."  Yet  why  not  parallel,  when  those  who  have  a  right 
to  make  a  bishop,  surely  give  him  a  right,  when  so  made, 
to  exercise  his  office  in  any  part  of  the  world,  where  he  can 
do  so,  without  encroaching  on  the  charge  or  right  of  ano- 
ther bishop;  and  it  will  not  be  said  that  the  right  to  a  king- 
dom can  be  conferred  but  on  similar  terms.  Possession 
may  be  obtained  by  force,  but  right  is  of  a  more  delicate 
nature.  During  all  the  time  of  Cromwell's  usurpation, 
Charles  the  Second  was  acknowledged  as  their  rightful 
king,  by  all  the  loyal  part  of  his  subjects ;  and  the  length 
of  his  reign  has  been  always  computed  from  the  day  of  his 
father's  death,  although  it  was  eleven  years  before  his  res- 
toration gave  him  the  actual  exercise  of  his  kingly  power. 
' — So  might  a  bishop  be  invested  with  Episcopal  authority, 
altho.igb  placed  in  a  situation  which  would  neither  require 
nor  admit  the  exercise  of  it. 

The  allusion  which  our  Lecturer  makes  use  of,  to  the 
connection  between  father  and  child,  and  between  husband 

*  Lecture  xi. 


Partioilar  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    271 

and  wife,  is  by  no  means  suited  to  the  case  in  hand,  as  these 
are  mere  states  or  conditions  of  hfe,  the  nature  of  which  is 
very  different  from  that  of  an  office,  the  former  depending 
altogether  on  a  particular  relation,  whereas  the  permanency 
of  the  latter  will  be  often  found  to  rest  on  a  more  general 
footing.  Such  is  evidently  the  case  with  regard  to  the  office 
of  a  shepherd,  which,  as  applied  to  the  Episcopal  character, 
does  not  necessarily  infer  an  immediate  charge  of  a  flock, 
since  there  may  be  other  subjects  of  inspection  that  come 
not  properly  within  the  idea,  which  that  term  conveys. 
When,  therefore,  our  Professor,  wishing  to  ridicule  the 
notion  of  a  bishop  in  partibus  infdelium^  observed  that  "  a 
bishop's  charge  being  a  church,  and  a  church  consisting 
only  of  believers,  infidels  are  properly  no  part  of  his  charge, 
no  more  than  wolves  or  foxes  are  part  of  the  flock  of  a 
shepherd,"  we  are  surprised  that  so  complete  an  analogist 
did  not  recollect,  that  infidels  may  become  believers,  but 
wolves  and  foxes  can  never  become  sheep.  Will  any  one 
say,  that  to  make  believers  of  infidels  is  no  part  of  the  of- 
fice of  a  bishop,  or  that  his  office  immediately  ceases,  when 
his  labours  in  that  way  are  no  longer  successful  I  If  such 
were  the  precarious  nature  of  the  shepherd's  office,  it  would 
hardly  have  been  applied  to  point  out  the  highest  possible 
instance  of  pastoral  care,  and  we  should  not  have  read  of 
"  sheep  going  astray,  and  afterwards  returning  to  the  Shep- 
herd and  bishop  of  their  souls." 

The  only  analogy,  therefore,  which  seems  at  all  applica- 
ble to  the  design  in  view,  is  that  v/hich  our  Professor 
makes  use  of,  when  he  says — ^'  Ye  cannot  make  a  man  an 
overseer,  to  whom  ye  give  no  oversight ;"  and  this  is  sup- 
posed to  arise  from  the  name  bishop  or  overseer^  as  con- 
nected with,  and  requiring,  things  or  persons  to  be  over- 
seen. He  might,  however,  have  remembered  his  own  ob- 
servation, that  "  the  import  of  words  gradually  changes 
with  the  manners  of  the  times  ;"  as  a  proof  of  which,  the 
word  presbyter  has  certainly  lost  the  import  which  he  him- 


272    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland 

self  assigned  to  it,  as  a  "  title  of  respect,"  denoting  a  sena- 
tor or  elderly  person,  since  it  would  now  be  thought  ridicu- 
lous, instead  of  "  ordaining  or  making  a  presbyter,"  to 
speak  of  "  ordaining  or  making  a  respectable  old  man;" 
and  may  not  the  same  change  have  happened  in  the  applica- 
tion of  the  name  bishop  or  overseer^  even  supposing  its  ori- 
ginal import  to  have  been  "  inspector  of  a  particular 
flock  ?"  Of  this,  however,  the  Professor  brings  no  sort  of 
proof,  but  runs  on,  in  his  usual  declamatory  style,  expatiat- 
ing on  his  favourite  topic,  that  "  a  bishop  continued  a 
bishop  only  whilst  he  continued  to  have  people  under  his 
pastoral  charge,  and  where  no  such  charge  was  given,  ordi- 
nation appeared  but  a  mere  illusion,  the  name  without  the 
thing.  For  nothing  can  be  plainer,"  says  he,  "  than  that 
as  yet,"  that  is,  in  the  fifth  century,  "  they  had  no  concep- 
tion of  the  mystic  character  impressed  by  the  bishop's  hand 
in  ordaining,  which  no  power  on  earth  can  cancel."^  A 
little  after  he  tells  us,  that  "  the  doctrine  of  the  character 
had  not  yet  been  discovered ;"  and  prosecuting  still  far- 
ther his  strained  analogy  between  marriage  and  ordination, 
he  boldly  asks — "  What  then  is  there  in  the  one  ceremony 
more  nugatory  than  in  the  other?  For  if  unmeaning  words 
will  satisfy,  why  may  not  the  mystical,  invisible,  indelible 
character  of  husband  be  imprinted  by  the  first,  as  that  of 
priest  or  bishop  is  by  the  second  ?  Holy  writ  gives  just  as 
much  countenance  to  the  one,  as  to  the  other. "t 

This,  we  think,  is  rather  rashly  affirmed ;  and  the  lan- 
guage made  use  of  in  delivering  such  a  strange  opinion, 
appears  to  us  as  void  of  delicacy,  as  inconsistent  with  the 
character,  which  ought  to  be  maintained  by  every  professor 
of  Christian  divinity.  Is  it  really  suitable  to  such  a  profes- 
sion, even  to  suppose,  much  more  to  assert,  that  there  is 
nothing  given  in  and  by  apostolical,  primitive,  regular  ordi- 
nation, but  such  a  bare  "  assignment  to  some  particular 

*  Lecture  xi.  f  Lecture. xi. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    273 

congregation,"  as  is  perfectly  similar  to  the  connection  be- 
tween husband  and  wife  ?  What  then  are  we  to  understand 
by  the  gift  (^x^i^'l"^^^  which  St.  Paul  twice  mentions  as  in 
Timothy,  and  in  both  places  ascribes  it — to  "  the  laying  on 
of  hands  ?"  Does  this  point  to  any  thing  like  his  "  assign- 
ment to  a  particular  congregation,"  or  to  any  sort  of  connec- 
tion with  a  pastoral  charge  ?  Have  we  not  more  reason  to 
believe,  that  this  charisma  or  gift  meant  something,  which, 
notwithstanding  Dr.  Campbell's  sarcastic  way  of  treating  it, 
might  be  called  a  "  character  impressed"  by  imposition  of 
hands,  and  which  Timothy  was  "  not  to  neglect,  but  to  stir 
up"  and  put  into  exercise,  so  as  to  answer  the  good  purpose 
for  which  he  had  received  it  ?  We  know,  that  the  charis- 
mata^ or  gifts  so  often  mentioned  as  peculiar  to  the  early 
ages  of  the  gospel,  have  been  generally  thought  to  denote 
the  miraculous  powers  with  which  many  of  the  primitive 
Christians  were  endowed,  even  down  to  that  period,  when 
our  adversaries  are  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  a  true  and 
proper  Episcopacy  universally  prevailed.  Yet  as  we  are 
not  told  of  any  miraculous  works  performed  by  Timothy  in 
consequence  of  the  gift  which  was  in  him  ;  and  as  it  is  ex- 
pressly said  to  have  been  placed  there  by  the  imposition  of 
'  hands,  and  that  it  might  be  stirred  up  in  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  to  which  he  had  been  appointed,  we  have  eveiy 
reason  to  conclude,  that  it  referred  entirely  to  his  ordina- 
tion, not  as  an  "  assignment  to  some  particular  congrega- 
tion," but  as  giving  him  authority  to  execute  his  office  ia 
any  congregation,  or  any  part  of  the  flock  of  Christ,  which 
might  be  committed  to  his  charge. 

Such,  we  have  ground  to  believe,  was  the  apostolic  prac- 
tice, founded  on  the  nature  of  the  .commission  which  the 
apostles  themselves  received  from  Christ,  as  extending  to 
all  nations,  and  all  ages  of  the  world.  It  was,  therefore,  a 
maxim  universally  received  in  the  primitive  church,  that 
every  bishop,  as  one  of  the  successors  of  these  apostles, 
had  a  pastoral  relation  to  the  vvhole  catholic  church,  and 


274    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

that  the  Episcopal  body  was  thus  widely  diffused,  for  the 
mutual  benefit  of  all  its  members,  that  if  any  one  fell  inta 
heresy,  others  might  be  at  hand  to  redress, the  mischief. 
Writing  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  on  this  very  subject,  Cy- 
prian tells  him — "  Therefore  is  our  bcxiy  of  bishops  so 
large,  and  yet  so  joined  together  in  the  bond  of  unity,  and 
cemented  by  mutual  agreement,  that  if  any  one  of  our  college 
should  attempt  to  introduce  heresy,  and  so  tear  in  pieces 
and  lay  waste  the  flock  of  Christ,  others  should  step  in  to 
its  assistance,  and  like  tender  and  useful  shepherds,  gather 
our  Lord's  sheep  into  his  fold. — For  though  we  are  many 
shepherds,  yet  we  have  but  one  flock  to  feed,  and  all  the 
sheep  which  Christ  has  purchased  with  his  blood  and  passion^ 
we  ought  to  gather  together  and  cherish."^'  From  these 
words  of  Cyprian,  and  many  other  passages  of  his  writings^ 
it  would  appear,  that  he  considered  the  college  or  corporation 
of  bishops,  as  founded  for  the  purpose  of  propagating  the 
Christian  faith  throughout  the  world,  and  preserving  it  in 
its  original  purity.  And  though  the  division  of  the  church 
into  dioceses,  and  the  placing  local  bishops  over  them,  be- 
came necessary  for  the  sake  of  order,  and  for  preventing 
any  improper  interference  with  each  others  conduct ;  yet 
when  the  faith  of  the  church  was  in  danger  of  being  lost, 
or  corrupted  by  the  prevalence  of  any  pestilent  heresy, 
every  bishop  was  to  consider  himself  as  an  universal  pas- 
tor, and  to  do  every  thing  in  his  power  for  preserving  the 
soundness,  and  promoting  the  welfare  of  the  whole  body. 
Such  being  evidently  the  opinion  entertained  by  Cyprian,  of 
what  he  calls  the  "  one  Episcopate,  of  which  every  bishop 

*  "  Idcirco  copiosum  est  corpus  sacerdotum,  concordiae  mutux  glutino 
atque  unitatis  vinculo  copulatum,  ut  si  quis  ex  collegio  nostro  hseresin  fa- 
cere,  et  gregem  Cnristi  lacerare  et  vastare  tentaverit,  subveniant  cjeteri, 
et  quasi  pastures  utiles  et  misericordes  oves  Dominicas  in  gregem  coUigant. 
Nam  e'si  pastores  multi  sumus,  unum  tamen  gregem  pascimus,  et  ovc: 
universas,  quas  Christus  sanguine  suo  et  passione  quaesivit,  colligere  t". 
fovere  debemus."     Cypr.  epist.  67.  ad  Steph. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    275 

holds  a  share  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole,"  we  are  indeed 
surprised  to  find  Dr.  Campbell  quoting  this  very  pas- 
sage, in  support  of  the  opposite  notion,  which  he  so  warmly- 
espoused,  that  a  bishop  is  to  be  considered  as  nothing  more 
than  the  "  pastor  of  a  particular  church  or  congregation," 
his  "  assignment"  to  which  is  all  that  is  meant  by  ordina- 
tion, and  without  which,  it  seems,  he  could  have  no  share 
in  the  "  one  Episcopate,"  which  yet  St.  Cyprian  so  zea- 
lously maintained  to  be  held  in  common  by  the  whole  body 
of  bishops,  and  therefore  held  by  them,  in  virtue  of  their 
ordination  or  appointment  to  the  Episcopal  office,  and  not 
of  their  "  assignment"  to  any  particular  charge. 

It  was  proper  that  we  should  take  notice  of  all  this  pre- 
paration which  our  Professor  had  made  for  effecting  what 
seems  to  have  been  the  principal  purpose  of  the  Lecture 
now  before  us,  the  bringing  forward  his  heavy  charge 
against  the  orders  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church,  which, 
after  all  that  he  had  said  by  way  of  introduction  to  it,  he 
still  thought  might  probably  excite  some  surprise,  as  well 
from  the  novelty  of  it,  as  by  the  confident  and  peremptory 
manner,  in  which  he  meant  to  support  it.  In  both  these 
respects,  we  do  think  it  was  sufficiently  calculated  to  pro- 
duce surprise  in  the  minds  of  all  who  might  esteem  it  wor- 
thy of  their  consideration,  on  account  of  the  station  and 
character  of  its  author.  Had  the  Principal  of  Marischal 
College  boldly  asserted,  that  a  civil  establishment  being  es- 
sential to  the  very  being  of  Episcopal  government,  it  is  im- 
possible that  the  order  of  bishops  can  be  continued  in  a 
church  which  is  not  supported  by  the  state  :  It  would  have 
been  saying  no  more,  than  what  had  been  said  before  by 
men  equally  high  in  office,  and  well  versed  in  all  sorts  of 
knowledge,  except  that  of  the  nature  and  constitution  of 
the  Christian  church.  Or  had  Dr.  Campbell,  who  was 
early  bred  to  the  study  of  the  la\y,  given  it  as  his  opinion, 
that  the  act  of  parliament  which  abolished  Episcopacy  in 
Scotland,  or  some  restricting  statute  afterward  enacted,  had 


276    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

actually  deprived  the  ejected  bishops  of  their  whole  spi- 
ritual power,  and  left  them  no  authority  even  to  ordain 
priests  and  deacons,  far  less  to  consecrate  bishops  as  their 
successors  in  these  powers  ;  this  would  have  been  only  re- 
peating the  absurdities  of  those  Erastian  writers,  who 
would  make  the  civil  power  superior  to  apostolic  institution, 
and  allow  an  authority  merely  human,  to  annihilate  the  di^ 
vine  commission  granted  by  him  who  has  all  power  in 
heaven  and  in  earth.  In  all  this  there  would  have  been  no- 
thing new  or  surprising,  however  inconsistent  with  the  cha- 
racter of  a  Christian  divine ;  because  such  inconsistencies 
have  often  appeared,  and  been  suifered  to  pass  as  liberal 
sentiments,  flowing  from  a  mind  unfettered  by  any  profes- 
sional prejudice. 

What  method  then  has  our  Professor  taken  to  support 
his  strange  attack  on  the  depressed  but  pure  and  primitive 
Episcopacy,  which  still  subsists  in  this  part  of  the  united 
kingdom  ?  Does  he  pretend  to  say,  that  the  bishops  of  Scot- 
land, who  were  deprived  of  their  legal  power  and  privi- 
leges, in  consequence  of  the  Revolution  in  1688,  considered 
themselves  as  equally  divested  of  all  spiritual  authority, 
and  therefore  took  no  measures  for  continuing  a  needless 
succession  of  bishops  in  a  church  so  suddenly  and  com- 
pletely cut  off,  as  that  of  Scodand  then  was,  from  all  its 
former  connection  with  the  state  l  No  :  even  Dr.  Camp- 
bell admits,  that  the  ejected  bishops,  dispersed  and  perse- 
cuted as  they  were,  continued  their  care  of  the  Episcopal 
succession,  and  ordained  several  bishops,  in  order  to  pre- 
serve it.— 'But  the  misfortune,  or  rather  the  folly,  as  he 
thinks  it,  was— these  new  bishops  *^  were  ordained  at 
large;"  and  because  they  had  not  httn previously  appointed 
each  to  a  certain  diocese,  or  had  not  received  what  he 
■would  call  "  assignment  to  a  particular  charge,"  he  main- 
tains^ with  dictatorial  authority,  that  their  ordinations  were 
null  and  void,  yea,  no  other  Xh^n  farcical  ceremonies,  in 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    277 

which  the  actors  played  the  fool,  for  the  purpose  of  impos- 
ing on  others. 

When  those,  from  whom  the  present  clergy  of  the  Scotch 
Episcopal  church  derive  their  orders,  were  known  to  be 
men  of  such  unblemished  integrity,  and  disinterested  zeal, 
as  to  induce  them  to  suffer  the  loss  of  all  their  worldly  dig- 
nities and  emoluments,  for  the  sake  of  what  they  esteemed 
to  be  infinitely  more  valuable,  truth  and  a  good  conscience, 
it  is  hard  to  hear  them  reviled  as  no  better  than  formal 
hypocrites,  striving  to  deceive  others,  and  acting  a  most  ri- 
diculous farce  in  pretending  to  discharge  one  of  the  most 
solemn  functions  of  their  sacred  office.  It  is  no  less 
surprising,  that  such  a  severe  accusation  should  be  pub- 
lished, as  coming  from  a  man,  who,  among  his  own  friends, 
was  much  admired  for  his  meekness  and  moderation,  and 
what  the  world  calls  liberality  of  mind.  Lest,  therefore,  we 
should  be  suspected  of  doing  injustice  to  his  character,  a 
tiling  which  it  particularly  becomes  us  to  avoid,  when  he  is 
no  longer  able  to  stand  up  in  its  defence,  we  shall  give  the 
indictment  brought  against  those  whom  he  calls  "  our 
Scotch  Episcopal  party,"  in  their  accuser's  own  words. 
After  quoting  some  authorities,  to  show  the  abuse  of  those 
loose  ordinations,  chiefly  of  presbyters,  which  were  begin- 
ning to  take  place  in  the  fifth  century,  he  proceeds  thus^ — 

"  One  will  perhaps  be  surprised  to  hear,  that  our  Scotch 
Episcopal  party,  who  have  long  affected  to  value  themselves 
on  the  regular  transmission  of  their  orders,  have  none  but 
what  they  derive  from  bishops  merely  nominal.  I  do  not 
mention  this  with  a  view  to  derogate  from  their  powers,  but 
only  as  an  argumentum  ad  hominem^  to  show  how  much 
their  principles  militate  against  themselves.  It  does  not 
suit  my  notion  of  Christianity  to  retaliate  on  any  sect,  or 
to  forbid  any  to  cast  out  devils  in  the  name  of  Christ,  be- 
cause they  follow  not  us.     If  the  lust  of  power  had  not 

*  Lecture  xi. 


2TB    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

with  churchmen  more  influence  than  the  spirit  of  the  gospel, 
greater  attention  would  have  been  given  to  the  decision  of 
their  Master  in  a  like  case.  Even  their  own  writers  ac- 
knowledge, that  immediately  after  the  death  of  Dr  Ross, 
bishop  of  Edinburgh,  the  last  of  those  ordained  before  the 
Revolution,  there  were  no  local  bishops  in  Scodand,  not 
one  appointed  to  any  diocese,  or  having  the  inspection  of 
any  people,  or  spiritual  jurisdiction  over  any  district.  But 
there  were  bishops  who  had  been  ordained  at  large,  some 
by  bishop  Ross,  others  by  some  of  the  Scotch  bishops,  who, 
after  the  Revolution,  had  retired  to  England.  The  warm- 
est partizans  of  that  sect  have  not  scrupled  to  own,  that  at 
that  gentleman's  decease,  all  the  dioceses  of  Scotland  were 
become  vacant,  and  even  to  denominate  those  who  had 
been  ordained  in  the  manner  above  mentioned,  Utopian 
bishops,  a  title  not  differing  materiall}^  from  that  I  have 
given  them,  merely  nominal  bishops^  for  as  far  as  I  can 
learn,  they  were  not  titular  even  in  the  lowest  sense.  No 
axiom  in  philosophy  is  more  indisputable  than  that  quod 
nidlibi  est  non  est, — The  ordination,  therefore,  of  our  pre- 
sent Scotch  Episcopal  clergy,  is  solely  from  presbyters  ; 
for  it  is  allowed,  that  those  men,  who  came  under  the 
hands  of  bishop  Ross,  had  been  regularly  admitted  minis- 
ters or  presbyters,  in  particular  congregations,  before  the 
Revolution.  And  to  that  first  ordination,  I  maintain,  that 
their  farcical  consecration  by  Doctor  Ross  and  others,  when 
they  were  solemnly  made  the  depositaries  of  no  deposit, 
commanded  to  be  dihgent  in  doing  no  work,  vigilant  in  the 
oversight  of  no  flock,  assiduous  in  teaching  and  governing 
no  people,  and  presiding  in  no  church,  added  nothing  at 
all." 

Such  is  the  ludicrous  manner  in  which  our  Lecturer 
thought  proper  to  represent  a  sacred  and  solemn  office, 
performed  by  men  of  piety  and  worth,  whatever  may  be 
thought  of  their  worldly  wisdom,  and  whose  conduct  in 
this  affair  ought  not,  we  humbly  think,  to  have  been  thus 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland*  2^9 

held  up  as  an  object  of  ridicule,  and  so  wantonly  exposed 
to  scorn  and  contempt.  To  add  to  the  mockery  too,  he 
would  not  have  it  thought,  that  "  it  suited  his  notion  of 
Christianity  to  retaliate  on  any  sect,  or  to  forbid  any  to  cast 
out  devils  in  the  name  of  Christ,  because  they  followed 
not  his  party."  He  had  before  been  quoting  the  passage  of 
scripture,  which  mentioned  the  occurrence  that  occasioned 
this  remark,  and  had  made  the  following  observation  upon 
it.  "  The  apostles  still  retained  too  much  of  the  Jewish 
spirit,  not  to  consider  more  the  party  than  the  cause.  '  He 
foUoweth  not  us;'  a  reason  which  to  this  day,  alas  !  would 
be  thought  the  best  reason  in  the  world  by  most  Christian 
sects,  and  by  every  individual  who  possesses  the  spirit  of 
the  sectary."^  And  is  all  this  particularly  levelled  at  the 
"  Scotch  Episcopal  party,"  as  if  they  were  peculiarly  pos- 
sessed of  this  sectarian  spirit  t  Let  a  miracle,  such  as 
casting  out  devils  in  the  name  of  Christ,  be  wrought  as 
really  and  visibly  as  in  the  instance  referred  to,  (for  the  apos- 
tles acknowledged  that  they  saw  it)  and  we  can  safely  affirm 
that  not  an  individual  of  our  sect  would  dare  to  forbid  such 
a  thing,  any  more  than  Dr.  Campbell  himself  would  have 
done.  But  he  certainly  knew  that  there  might  be  pre- 
tenders to  this  miraculous  power,  who  might  use  the  name 
of  Christ,  without  any  "  pious  intention  to  promote  his 
cause,"  of  which  we  have  a  striking  instance  in  the  case  of 
those  "  vagabond  Jews,  exorcists,  who  took  upon  them  to 
call  over  them  which  had  evil  spirits,  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,"  and  were  justly  punished  for  their  impious 
presumption.f 

With  an  appearance,  however,  of  candour  and  modera- 
tion, our  Professor  told  his  pupils,  that  what  he  had  men- 
tioned, or  was  going  to  mention,  respecting  the  "  Scotch 
Episcopal  party,"  was  "  with  no  view  to  derogate  from  their 
powers :"  to  which  we  shall  only  beg  leave  to  apply  his  own 

*  Lecture  iv.  f  Acts  xix.  13—17. 


280    Particular  Defence  of  the  Eptscopaty  of  Scotland 

remark  on  the  conduct  oif  David  Hume  in  a  similar  case-— 
"  Was  ever  so  rough  an  assault  preceded  by  so  smooth  a 
preamble  ?"^  For  in  what  way  could  he  have  more  effec- 
tually "  derogated  from  their  powers,"  than  by  representing 
what  he  thought  the  source  of  these  powers,  as  no  better 
than  2i  farcical  ceremony,  which  "  added  nothing  to  the  first 
ordination"  of  those  on  whom  it  was  performed,  and  "  from 
whom  was  particularly  withheld  the  right  of  transmitting 
orders  to  others  ?"  If  this  be  the  "  argumentum  ad  homi' 
nen^'*  made  use  of  "  to  show,  how  much  the  principles  of 
the  Scotch  Episcopalians  militate  against  themselves,"  the 
application  of  the  argument  ought  to  have  been  properly 
pointed  out,  and  these  hostile  principles  particularly  speci- 
fied :  And  as  this  has  not  been  done,  it  may  be  presumed, 
that  the  learned  Professor  knew  as  little  of  the  principles  of 
these  Episcopalians,  as  they  perhaps  know  of  his  "  notion 
of  Christianity,"  and  the  propriety  of  the  method  which  he 
has  here  taken  to  support  it. 

In  this  state  of  uncertainty,  with  regard  to  the  applica- 
tion and  strength  of  his  reasoning,  we  are  led  by  some  cir- 
cumstances to  conjecture,  that  the  argument  alluded  to,  as 
so  happily  brought  home  to  the  "  Scotch  Episcopal  party," 
may  probably  be  drawn  from  the  canon  of  an  ancient  coun- 
cil, which  he  has  quoted  and  commented  on,  as  particu- 
larly applicable  to  the  case  in  hand,  and  to  the  sentiments 
of  a  "  party,"  who  are  supposed  to  hold  in  peculiar  rever- 
ence every  thing  that  is  truly  primitive  in  ecclesiastical  ad- 
ministration. The  canon  referred  to,  is  the  6th  of  the 
general  council  of  Chalcedon,  in  which  he  says,  "  all  such 
loose  ordinations,  of  bishops  at  large  without  a  diocese, 
are  declared,  I  say  not  irregular  or  uncanonical,  but  abso* 
lutel)^  null :"  And  to  give  the  more  weight  to  this  canon, 
he  adds  the  decision  of  Leo,  a  contemporary  pope,  or  bishop 
rjf  Rome,  who,  he  says,  "  on  account  of  his  writhigs,  is 

*  Dissevtatlcn  on  Mlracle<;,  p.  243. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    281 

considered  as  a  doctor  of  the  church,  and  affirms  posi* 
tively  in  one  of  his  letters,  that  the  ordination  is  to  be 
counted  vain,  or  of  no  effect,  which  is  neither  founded  in 
place,  nor  fortified  by  authority'."  The  first  of  these  clauses 
our  Doctor  explains  so  as  to  make  it  suit  his  own  purpose, 
but  takes  no  farther  notice  of  the  second,  which  requires 
authority  in  the  ordainer,  to  give  validity  to  the  ordination, 
}fi  whatever  place  the  person  ordained  may  be  called  to  ex- 
ercise his  ministry. 

In  his  next  lecture  we  find  our  Professor  endeavouring 
to  procure  still  farther  sanction  to  the  authority  of  the 
council  of  Chalcedon,  by  putting  us  in  mind  of  the  opinion 
of  Pope  Gregory  the  Great,  who  is  said  to  have  held  the 
four  first  general  councils  in  equal  veneration  with  the  four 
gospels.  And  how  comes  all  this  to  afford  any  peculiar  force 
of  argument  against  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church,  which,  if 
it  esteems  these  two  bishops  of  Rome,  the  first  and  best  of 
their  names,  as  doctors  of  the,  church,  and  holds  in  all  due 
veneration  the  four  first  general  councils,  is  yet  entirely  of 
the  opinion  of  the  church  of  England,  as  expressed  in  her 
21st  article,  that  "  general  councils  may  err,  and  sometimes 
have  erred,  even  in  things  pertaining  unto  God  ?"  With  re^ 
spect,  however,  to  the  present  point  in  question,  we  do  not 
see  that  it  is  at  all  concerned  with  the  regard  which  is  due  to 
the  authority  of  general  councils,  and  which  must  always  be 
regulated  by  the  consideration  of  the  particular  objects 
which  their  several  canons  had  in  view,  according  to  the 
circumstances  of  the  church  at  the  different  periods  when 
these  ecclesiastical  synods  were  held.  The  council  of 
Chalcedon  was  called  for  the  express  purpose  of  repressing 
the  Eutychian  heresy;  and  its  sixth  canon  has  been  gene^ 
rally  thought  to  point  at  the  danger  of  increasing  that  he- 
resy, by  su'feh  irregular  ordinations  as  might  tend  to  give 
k  additional  support,  and  Vv^ere  therefore  prohibited ;  whichi 
prohibition  was  enforced  by  an  imperial  edict,  evidendy 
fgynded  on  the  same  reason,  and  published  for  the  §apri^ 

36 


282    Pnrticular  Defence  cfthe  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

purpose.  Dr.  Campbell  has  omitted  to  quote  the  intro- 
ductory part  of  the  canon,  in  which  the  prohibition  is  par- 
ticularly levelled  at  "  the  loose  ordination  of  presbyters 
and  deacons^^  as  most  likely  to  continue  the  mischief  which 
Jiad  arisen  from  the  heresy  that  was  now  condemned :  and 
he  has  also  kept  out  of  sight  the  conclusion  of  the  canoti 
which  seems  to  prohibit  the  persons  so  ordained  from 
performing  the  functions  of  their  ministry,  lest  they  should 
do  it  to  the  reproach  or  injury  of  the  person  who  had  or- 
dained them.^ 

We  could  produce  many  respectable  authorities  in  con- 
tfirmation  of  the  opinion  which  has  now  been  given  of  the 
meaning  and  design  of  this  Chalcedonian  canon.  The  au- 
thor of  that  celebrated  work  called  "  Ecclesiastical  Polity ^^ 
and  who  is  generally  distinguished  by  the  title  of  the  "judi- 
cious Hooker,"  argues  very  strongly  against  the  error  of 
those,  who,  "  because  the  names  of  all  church-officers  are 
words  of  relation  ;  because  a  shepherd  must  have  his  flock, 
a  teacher  his  scholars,  a  minister  his  company  which  he 

*  The  whole  canon  runs  thus  in  the  original.  Islt^vict.  ^e  a'jroMXviJLBmg 
,X^i^oTovH;^a,t^  [myite  nPESBTTEPON,  //,*)T£  AIAKONON,  fxnrs  oAwj 
Ttva  Tuv  Ev  E)cx.X»5a-tari>tw  Tay/>t,aTi,  h  jj^n  loiKuii  tv  ix.KXvsa'ia.  'croXtuq  to  JcwjiAWfj 
tj'  jLtapTyptw,  n*  [xovaTnfto^  o  ;^£ipoTov«jU£v^  siriKvifvlloilo*  T^i"  ^a  a.TToXvTxng 
^EtpoToy^^jUEVSj  upicrtv  'ri  aytcc  cruvoJ''^  a,KVfov  Ep^flv  rrjv  rokxvlm  ;^£*po9£criav, 
Kcw  i^nlo^^s  ^uv«o-9ai  mfx^i-^  E^  'TBPEI  TOY  XEIP0T0NHSANT02. 
It  is  thus  translated  by  a  German  writer,  of  Lutheran  principles. — 
"  Neminem  absolute  ordinari  presbyterum  vel  diaconum,  vel  quemlibet 
in  ecclesiastica  ordinatione  constitutum,  nisi  manifeste  in  ecclesia  civi- 
tatis,  sive  possessionis,  aut  in  martyrio,  aut  in  monasterio,  qui  ordinatur^ 
mereatur  ordinationis  publicatce  vocabulum.  Eorum  vero  qui  absolute  oi- 
dinantur,  decrevit  sancta  synodus  vacuam  haberi  manus  impositionem, 
et  nullum  ejus  tale  factum  valere,  ad  injuriam  ipsius  qui  eum  ordinavit." 
To  which  he  adds  this  remark,  "  Recte  prohibet  hie  canon,  ne  quis,  nisi 
■in  publico  loco  (qualia  erant  templa,  oratoria,  et  cedificia  martyribus  con- 
secrata)  ad  ministerium  ecclesiasticum  ordinetur.  Et  apud  nos  hodie 
in  ducatu  Wurtenbergico,  ordinationes  fiunt  in  csetu  ecclesisc."  Vide 
Epitome  Historic  Ecclesiasiicx.  A  Lucas  Osiander,  D.  D.  4to.  Tu.> 
bingec,  1597,  p.  356. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    283 

ininistereth  iinto ;  therefore  suppose  that  no  man  should  b© 
ordained  a  minister  but  for  some  particular  congregationy 
and  unless  he  be  tied  to  some  certain  parish.  Perceive  they 
i|ot,"  says  he,  *'  how  by  this  means  they  make  it  unlawful 
for  the  church  to  employ  men  at  all  in  converting  nations  ? 
For  if  so  be  the  church  may  not  lawfully  admit  to  an  eccle- 
siastical function,  unless  it  tie  the  party  admitted  unto  some 
particular  parish,  then  surely  a  thankless  labour  it  is, 
whereby  men  seek  the  conversion  of  infidels,  who  know  not 
Christ,  and  therefore  cannot  be  as  yet  divided  into  their 
special  congregations  and  flocks."  For  the  avoiding,  there-* 
fore,  of  all  confusion  in  treating  of  this  matter,  he  thinks 
there  is  nothing  more  material,  than  first — to  separate- 
"  exactly  the  nature  of  the  ministry  from  the  use  and  ex-^ 
ercise  thereof.  Secondly,  to  know  that  the  only  true  and 
proper  act  of  ordination  is  to  invest  men  with  that  power^ 
which  doth  make  them  ministers,  by  consecrating  their  per-» 
sons  to  God  and  his  service,  in  holy  things,  during  the  terni 
of  life,  whether  they  exercise  that  power  or  no.  Thirdly, 
that  to  give  them  a  title  or  charge  where  to  use  their  minis- 
try, concerneth  not  the  making,  but  the  placing  of  God's 
ministers ;  therefore  the  laws,  which  concern  only  their 
election  or  admission  to  that  place  or  charge,  are  not  appli-i 
cable  to  infringe,  in  any  way,  their  ordination.  And,  fourth- 
ly, that  as  oft  as  any  ancient  constitution,  law,  or  canon  is 
alleged  concerning  either  ordinations  or  elections,  we  forget 
not  to  examine,  whether  the  present  case  be  the  same  which 
the  ancient  was,  or  else  do  contain  some  just  reason,  for 
which  it  cannot  a'dmit  altogether  the  same  rules,  which  for- 
mer affairs  of  the  church,  now  altered,  did  then  require." 

Having  laid  down  these  premises,  and  shown  the  neces- 
sity of  attending  properly  to  them,  in  all  questions  relating 
to  the  ordination  and  appointment  of  the  Christian  minis- 
try, this  learned  writer  draws  such  a  conclusion  from  them, 
as  affords  a  sufficient  defence  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  ordi- 
nations against  any  misapplication  of  that  canon  of  the 


^84    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

Council  of  Chalcedon,  which  is  now  under  our  considera« 
tion :  "  Absolutely  therefore,"  says  he,  "  it  is  not  true,  that 
any  ancient  canoii  of  the  church,  which  is,  or  ought  to  be 
with  us  in  force,  doth  make  ordinations  at  large  unlawful ; 
and  as  the  state  of  the  church  doth  stand,  they  are  most 
necessary.  If  there  be  any  conscience  in  men,  touching 
that  which  they  write  or  speak,  let  them  consider  as  well 
what  the  present  condition  of  all  things  doth  now  suffer, 
as  what  the  ordinances  of  former  ages  did  appoint ;  as  well 
the  weight  of  those  causes,  for  which  our  affairs  have 
altered,  as  the  reasons,  in  regard  whereof,  our  fathers  and 
predecessors  did  sometime  strictly  and  severely  keep  that 
which  for  us  to  observe  now,  is  neither  meet,  nor  always 
possible."^ 

To  the  same  purpose,  we  find  another  lio  less  venerable 
author,  the  pious  Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor,  when  mentioning 
this  very  decree  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  making  a  dis- 
tinction between  those  ordinations  which,  for  particular  rea-* 
sons  of  prudence  or  expediency,  were  declared  to  be  un- 
canonical  and  irregular,  and  those  which  were  always  held 
to  be  null  and  void  in  their  own  nature.^  Of  the  latter  kind 
was  every  ordination,  which  was  not  sanctioned  by  proper 
Episcopal  authority  in  the  ordainer ;  whereas  the  former 
were  prohibited  merely  for  the  sake  of  order  and  regularity, 
after  it  was  found  expedient  to  allot  a  certain  portion  of  the 
church  to  the  inspection  of  every  particular  bishop^  assisted 
in  certain  parts  of  his  pastoral  office  by  the  subordinate 
tlergy  of  his  own  district.  But  this  restriction  to  a  pecu- 
liar charge  was  not  founded  in  any  thing  essential  to  the 
nature  of  the  Christian  priesthood  :  It  arose  entirely  from 
local  circumstances,  and  was  marked  by  such  limits  of  con- 
venience as  were  produced  by  a  variety  of  causes  operating 
differently  in  different  countries,  but  all  uniting  in  the  pre- 


*  See  Ilnoker^s  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  book  v.  p.  330,  53 
t  Sec  Bishop  Taylor's  Episcopacy  Asserted,  sect,  xxxii. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    2gj 

sfervation  of  what  St.  Cyprian  called  the  "  one  Episcopate" 
of  divine  appointment,  parcelled  out  by  ecclesiastical  autho- 
rity and  consent,  into  such  parts  and  portions  as  might  be 
severally  held  bv  their  respective  bishops,  for  conjunctly 
promoting  the  common  cause  of  their  great  Lord  and  Mas- 
ter, the  Shepherd  and  Bishop  of  souls. 

"  Here,  then,"  as  Dr.  Potter,^  another  eminent  divine, 
expresses  himself  on  this  subject,  "  we  must  carefully  dis- 
tinguish between  the  ordination  of  ministers,  and  their  de- 
signation to  particular  districts.  For  these  are  things  wholly 
different,  though  they  often  went  together  ;  it  being  mani- 
fest, that  one  may  be  a  bishop,  or  priest,  where  he  has  no 
aut|iority  to  exercise  his  office  ;  which  is  the  case  not  only 
of  those  who  are  ordained  to  convert  heathens,  without  any 
title  to  a  particular  church;  but  all  others  who  travel  be- 
yond the  limits  of  their  own  district:  For  a  priest  who 
comes  into  a  foreign  country,  where  other  lawful  ministers 
are  settled,  still  retains  his  sacerdotal  character,  and  yet 
has  no  authority  to  take  upon  him  the  ordinary  exercise  of 
his  office  there." 

All  this,  indeed,  is  in  perfect  conformity  to  that  part  of 
the  established  doctrine  of  the  church  of  England  which  is 
laid  down  in  her  ordination  offices,  as  fully  expressive  of 
her  sentiments  on  the  point  now  before  us.  Thus  in  the 
*'  ordering  of  priests,"  the  candidate  "  receives  the  Holy 
Ghost,  for  the  office  and  work  of  a  priest  in  the  church  of 
God,  committed  unto  him  by  the  imposition  of  hands ;" 
and  on  receiving  the  bible  from  the  bishop,  he  gets  "  au- 
thority to  preach  the  word  of  God,  and  to  minister  the 
holy  sacraments  in  the  congregation,  where  he  shall  be 
lawfully  appointed  thereunto."  So  likewise  in  the  "  conse- 
cration of  bishops,"  when  the  presiding  bishop  has  said — 
"  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  for  the  office  and  work  of  a 
bishop  in  the  church  of  God,  now  committed  unto  thee, 

•^  See  his  Dhcour.nc  on  Church  Government,  p.  452. 


2S6    Particular  Defence  of  the  EpiscGpacy  nf  Scotland 

by  the  imposition  of  our  hands,  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  Amen ;" — He 
immediately  adds — "  And  remember  that  thou  stir  up  the 
grace  of  God,  which  is  given  thee,  by  this  imposition  of 
our  hands ;"  where  the  admonition  plainly  alludes  to  the 
;^a^to-.x«  (charisma)  the  gift  or  grace,  which  was  given  to 
Timothy  by  the  same  means,  and  points  out  both  the  na- 
ture and  design  of  it.  But  not  a  word  is  said  in  all  this 
solemn  act  of  immediate  "  ordination,  by  laying  on  of 
hands,"  that  has  the  least  appearance  of  connecting  it  with, 
or  making  it  depend  upon,  what  Dr.  Campbell  insists,  is 
absolutely  essential,  "the  solemn  assignment  of  the  per- 
sons ordained,  to  a  particular  charge."  Yet  this  "  form  of 
consecrating  bishops,  which  is  according  to  the  order  of 
the  church  of  England,"  is  the  very  form  by  which  those 
bishops  were  consecrated,  from  whom  the  present  Scotch 
Episcopal  clergy  derive  their  orders,  and  who,  in  Dr.  Camp- 
bell's estimation,  "  surprising"  as  the  discovery  may  seem, 
were  no  other  than  "  bishops  merely  nomtnal^'^  that  is,  as- 
suming the  name,  but  possessing  none  of  the  power  or  au- 
thority peculiar  to  bishops. 

Let  us,  then,  examine  a  little  more  particularly  how  this 
matter  stands,  and  consider  the  peculiar  situation  of  the 
bishops  who  were  ejected  at  the  revolution,  and  of  those 
who  were  their  immediate  successors  in  the  Episcopal  of- 
fice, together  with  the  motives  which  influenced  their  con- 
duct in  providing  for  that  succession  :  From  all  this  it  will 
appear  what  a  strange  misrepresentation  Dr.  Campbell  has 
given  of  the  whole  affair,  as  unworthy  of  his  character,  as 
it  is  unjust  to  those  whom  he  has  thus  endeavoured,  but, 
we  hope,  vainly  endeavoured,  to  expose  in  the  most  ridi- 
culous and  contemptible  hght.  That  the  prelates  of  Scot- 
land, before  their  legal  ejection  took  place  in  consequence 
of  the  revolution,  were  true  and  lawful  bishops^  in  every 
sense  which  these  terms  can  bear,  he  has  not  attempted 
to  deny ;  nor  indeed  has  he  deigned  to  take  the  least  notic<" 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    28f 

of  the  cause  or  manner  of  their  ejection,  whence  it  pro* 
ceeded,  or  how  it  was  conducted.  The  fact,  however,  is 
certain  ;  and  the  only  point  in  question  is,  what  these  bi- 
shops became,  after  they  were  thus  legally  deprived  of 
their  sees,  their  revenues,  and  all  kind  of  temporal  juris- 
diction. We  have  already  seen  our  Lecturer  laying  it 
down,  as  "  a  thing  so  plain,  that  one  is  almost  ashamed  to 
attempt  to  illustrate  it,  that  as  in  fact  a  man  ceases  to  be  a 
husband  the  moment  that  he  ceases  to  have  a  wife,  and  is 
•no  longer  a  shepherd  than  he  has  the  care  of  sheep,  so,  in 
the  only  proper  and  original  import  of  the  words,  a  bishop 
continues  a  bishop  only  whilst  he  continues  to  have  people 
under  his  spiritual  care."  Plain,  however,  as  all  this  appears, 
we  are  at  some  loss  to  know  what  is  here  meant  by  a  "  bi- 
shop's having  people  under  his  spiritual  care  .•"  Not  that 
there  is  any  ambiguity  in  the  words  themselves,  but  be- 
cause we  often  find  Dr.  Campbell  putting  a  very  different 
«ense  on  the  powers  and  cares  of  bishops,  from  that,  in 
which  we  think  the  church  has  always  understood  them. 
Yet  we  may  surely  take  it  for  granted,  from  his  own  con- 
cession, that  the  ejected  Scotch  bishops  once  had  people 
under  their  spiritual  care  ;  and  this  being  acknowledged, 
^ve  may  also  take  the  liberty  of  asking  two  simple  questions, 
on  which  may  be  said  to  turn  the  main  hinge  of  the  argu- 
ment between  Dr.  Campbell  and  us.  One  of  these  questions 
is — By  what  means  were  those  bishops  invested  with  this 
spiritual  care ;  or  from  what  source  did  they  derive  their 
right  to  it?  Our  Professor  could  not  say,  what  no  true 
presbyterian,  indeed  no  true  Christian,  will  say,  that  they 
deriyed  it  from  the  state,  which  never  pretended  either  to 
exercise  or  claim  any  power  of  "  ministering  either  of 
God's  word  or  sacraments,"  or  of  conveying  any  thing 
whatever,  which  may  truly  be  called  spiritual  And  if  the 
ease  be  really  so,  the  next  question  is — Did  the  ejection  of 
these  bishops  by  the  civil  power  deprive  them  of  any 
fwc^ly  ^spiritual  right,  which  they  had  possessed  before. 


288    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

and  had  been  put  in  possession  of,  by  ecclesiastical  power 
only  ?  This  question,  we  hope,  will  also  be  answered  in 
the  negative  :  or  had  there  been  any  doubt  about  it  in  the 
minds  of  Dr.  Campbell's  pupils,  they  might  have  been  re- 
ferred for  a  solution  of  it  to  a  divine  of  the  church  of  Eng- 
land, the  learned  Dr.  Prideaux,  author  of  the  "  Connec- 
tion  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament^''  which  their  Professor, 
in  his  first  lecture,  had  called  an  "  excellent  work,  and  ear*- 
nestly  recommended  to  their  perusal ;"  and  in  which  they 
would  have  found  the  following  account  of  the  Christian 
priesthood,  as,  in  this  respect,  similar  to  the  Jewish : 

"  For  to  instance  in  Episcopacy,  the  first  order  of  it,  be- 
sides the  ecclesiastical  office,  which  is  derived  from  Christ 
alone,  it  hath  in  Christian  states  annexed  to  ic  (as  with  us) 
the  temporal  benefice  (that  is,  the  revenues  of  the  bishop- 
rick)  and  some  branches  of  the  temporal  authority,  as  the 
probate  of  wills,  causes  of  tithes,  causes  of  defamation,  8s:c» 
All  which  latter  most  certainly  is  held  under  the  temporal 
state,  but  not  the  former. — Were  this  distinction  duly  con- 
sidered, it  would  put  an  end  to  those  Erastian  notions  which 
now  so  much  prevail  among  us.  For  the  want  of  this  is  the 
true  cause,  that  many  observing  some  branches  of  the  Epis* 
copal  authority  to  be  from  the  state,  wrongfully  from  hence 
infer,  that  the  rest  is  so  too  ;  whereas,  would  they  duly  ex^ 
amine  the  matter,  they  would  find,  that  besides  the  tempo- 
ral power  and  temporal  revenues,  with  which  bishops  are 
invested,  there  is  also  an  ecclesiastical  or  spiritual  power, 
which  is  derived  from  none  other  than  Christ  alone.  And 
the  same  distinction  may  also  serve  to  quash  another  con- 
troversy, which  was  much  agitated  among  us,  in  the  reign 
of  his  late  Majesty,  King  William  the  third,  about  the  act 
which  deprived  the  bishops,  who  would  not  take  the  oaths 
to  that  king.  For  the  contest  then  was,  that  an  act  of  Par- 
liament could  not  deprive  a  bishop.  This  we  acknowledgi^ 
to  be  true  in  respect  of  the  spiritual  office,  but  not  in  re- 
spect of  the  benefice,  and  other  temporal  advantages  an(i 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.  289 

powers  annexed  thereto.  For  these  every  bishop  receiveth 
from  the  state,  and  the  state  can  again  deprive  anv  bishop 
of  them  on  a  just  cause.  And  this  was  all  that  was  done 
by  the  said  act.  For  the  bishops  that  were  then  deprived 
by  it,  had  still  their  Episcopal  office  left  entire  to  them ; 
they  being  as  much  bishops  of  the  church  universal  after 
their  deprivation,  as  they  were  before."^ 
•  Such  is  the  clear  and  distinct  account  which  Dr.  Pri- 
deaux  gives  of  this  matter ;  and  it  should  be  remembered, 
that  the  case  to  which  he  alludes,  of  the  deprived  bishops 
in  England,  was  of  a  much  more  perplexed  and  intricate 
mature,  than  that  of  their  brethren  in  Scotland  ;  the  former 
leading  to  an  unhappy  separation  of  one  part  of  an  Episco- 
pal church  from  another,  whilst  the  latter  was  an  overturn- 
ing of  the  whole  established  Episcopacy  at  once,  and 
obliged  the  Scotch  Episcopalians  of  that  day  to  defend  their 
cause,  as  it  has  been  defended  ever  since,  on  those  general 
principles,  by  which  their  ecclesiastic  polity  was  supported 
in  the  first  and  purest  ages  of  Christianity.  This  was  the 
apology  made  for  us  in  the  year  1792,  when  that  distin- 
guished prelate,  Dr.  Horsely,  then  bishop  of  St.  David's, 
now  of  St.  Asaph,  stood  up  to  plead  our  cause  in  the  great 
council  of  the  nation,  with  a  strength  of  argument,  and 
dignity  of  mind,  which  did  him  equal  honour  as  a  bishop 
of  the  church,  and  a  peer  of  the  realm.  "  These  Episco- 
palians," said  his  Lordship,  "  take  a  distinction,  and  it  is 
a  just  distinction,  between  a  purely  spiritual,  and  a  political 
Episcopacy.  A  political  Episcopacy  belongs  to  an  esta- 
blished church,  and  has  no  existence  out  of  an  establish- 
ment. This  sort  of  Episcopacy  was  necessarily  unknown 
in  the  world  before  the  time  of  Constantine.  But  in  all 
die  preceding  ages,  there  was  a  pure  spiritual  Episcopacy, 
an  order  of  men  set  apart  to  inspect  and  manage  the  spi- 
ritual affairs  of  the  church,  as  a  society  in  itself  totally  un- 

*   Connection  of  the  Old  and  Nexv  Testmnent^  part  ii.  book  3,  p.  161. 
37 


290    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland 

connected  with  civil  government.  Now,  these  Scotch 
Episcopalians  think,  that  when  their  church  was  cast  off 
by  the  state  at  the  revolution,  their  church,  in  this  dis- 
carded, divided  state,  reverted  to  that  which  had  been  the 
condition  of  every  church  in  Christendom,  before  the  esta- 
blishment of  Christianity  in  the  Roman  empire  by  Con- 
stantine  the  Great ;  that  losing  all  their  pohtical  capacity, 
the)'  retained,  however,  the  authority  of  the  pure  spiritual 
Episcopacy  within  the  church  itself. — That  is  the  sort  of 
Episcopacy  to  which  they  now  pretend,  and  I,  as  a  church- 
man, have  some  respect  for  that  pretension."^ 

On  these  principles,  therefore,  founded  in  the  very  nature 
and  constitution  of  the  Christian  church,  we  may  safely  say, 
that  the  bishops  of  Scotland,  ejected  at  the  revolution,  con- 
tinued to  be  as  much  bishops,  in  the  pure  ecclesiastical  sense 
of  the  w^ord,  after,  as  they  had  been  before  their  ejection ; 
and  were  so,  even  on  Dr.  Campbell's  restricting  plan,  when 
supported  by  all  his  allusions  to  father  and  husband,  sove- 
reign and  shepherd ;  since  it  is  a  certain  fact,  that j  notwith- 
standing the  parliamentary  abolition  of  prelacy,  great  num-» 
bers,  both  of  clergy  and  laity,  or,  as  the  Doctor  would  rather 
have  called  them,  presbyters  and  people,  adhered  to  the 
deprived  bishops,  and  acknowledged  themselves  to  be  still 
"  under  their  spiritual  care."  And  was  this  "  spiritual  care" 
of  the  Scotch  church  to  cease  entirely  at  the  death  of  these 
bishops  ?  Or,  because  our  Professor  will  not  allow  that  the 
apostles  could  have  successors,  on  account  of  the  extraordi- 
nary powers  with  which  these  apostles  were  invested,  was 
there  any  thing  so  peculiar  in  the  character  of  bishops, 
precisely  such  as  we  have  shown  the  bishops  of  the  three 
first  centuries  to  have  been,  that  they  could  not  have  others 
to  succeed  them  in  their  spiritual  charge,  or  use  the  same 


*  See  a  Narrative  of  the  Proceedings  relating  to  an  act  which  was 
passed  in  1/92,  for  granting  relief  to  pas'cors,  nvinisters,  and  lav  persons 
of  the  Ejiiscopal  communion  in  Scotland.    Printed  at  Aberdeen,  1792. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    291 

means  for  preserving  that  succession,  as  had  been  used  for 
the  same  purpose  in  every  age  and  under  every  state  or 
condition  of  the  Christian  church  ? 

But,  says  our  Lecturer,  "  even  their  own  writers  acknow- 
ledge, that  immediately  after  the  death  of  Dr.  Ross,  bishop 
of  Edinburgh,  the  last  of  these  ordained  before  the  revolu- 
tion, there  were  no  local  bishops  in  Scotland,  not  one  ap- 
pointed to  any  diocese,  or  having  the  inspection  of  any  peo- 
ple, or  spiritual  jurisdiction  over  any  district."  And  sup- 
posing this  to  have  been  the  case,  we  shall  be  able  to  show 
how  easily  it  may  be  accounted  for,  and  what  regular  steps 
were  taken  for  having  again  local  bishops,  appointed  to  their 
several  dioceses  or  districts,  as  soon  as  circumstances 
would  permit. — Even  our  adversary  acknowledges,  that 
at  the  period  he  mentions,  "  there  were  bishops  in  Scot- 
land, who  had  been  ordained  at  large,  some  by  Bishop 
Ross,  others  by  some  of  the  Scotch  bishops,  who,  after 
the  revolution,  had  retired  to  England*"*  And  from 
what  has  been  already  said  on  the  nature  of  ordination  and 
Episcopal  consecration,  it  is  evident,  that  these  were  real, 
duly  consecrated  bishops,  possessed  of  the  power  of  con- 
secrating others,  and  of  taking  the  charge  of  any  diocese 
.or  district  that  might  be  committed  to  their  inspection. 

It  is  allowed,  even  by  Dr.  Campbell,  '*  that  those  men 
who  came  under  the  hands  of  bishop  Ross,  had  been  regu- 
larly admitted  ministers  or  presbyters  in  particular  congre- 
gations before  the  revolution ;"  and  it  is  equally  certain, 
diat  they  had  flocks,  perhaps  but  "  little  flocks,"  yet  not 

*  This  seems  to  bo  very  inaccurately  stated,  as  none  of  the  ejected 
bishops  performed  any  consecration  in  England,  and  only  one  Scotch 
bishop  was  consecrated  there,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  Appendix  No.  I. 
from  which  it  will  also  appear,  that  though  Dr.  Campbell  speaks  only 
of  the  bishop  of  Edinburgh  as  the  ordainer,  yet  the  first  consecration  in 
Scotland  after  the  revolution,  was  performed  by  the  archbishop  of  Glas- 
gow, and  bishop  of  Dunblane,  in  conjunction  with  the  bishop  of  Edin- 
burgh ;  and  every  consecration  since  has  been  performed  by  the  canoni- 
«jil  numljer  of  bishops. 


292    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

despicable  on  that  account,  which  still  continued  under 
their  spiritual  care,  and  according  to  our  Professor's  de- 
scription of  the  primitive  practice,  "  could  assemble  with 
their  several  pastors  in  one  house,  for  the  purpose  of  pub- 
lic worship :"  And  if  it  were  true,  as  he  says,  that  for 
many  years  after  the  introduction  of  Episcopacy  into  the 
church,  a  bishop's  pastoral  charge  did  not  extend  beyond  a 
single  congregation,  then  would  it  necessarily  follow  on  his 
principles,  that  these  Scotch  pastors,  when  promoted  to  the 
Episcopal  order  by  a  solemn  and  regular  consecration,  be- 
came not  only  primitive  bishops,  but,  in  his  opinion,  perhaps 
the  only  primitive  bishops,  who  were  then  to  be  found  in 
Britain,  or  any  other  country.  They  were  certainly  ''  paro- 
chial bishops,"  even  in  Dr.  Campbell's  view  of  their  charac- 
ter ;  and  we  know  not  what  good  reason  he  could  have  as- 
signed, why  their  parochial  charge,  however  small,  might  not 
have  been  called  their  diocese,  or  might  not  have  swelled  to 
such  an  extent,  by  the  addition  of  neighbouring  congrega- 
tions, as  to  become  a  diocese,  even  in  the  modem  sense  of 
the  word.  It  is  of  no  consequence,  that  an  unprecedented 
scheme  was  afterwards  set  on  foot,  for  committing  the 
whole  government  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church  to  a  col- 
lege of  bishops,  who  were  to  act  in  common,  without  any 
of  them  being  appointed  to  the  charge  of  a  particular  dis- 
trict: And  it  is  now  as  little  worthy  of  notice,  that  in  op- 
position to  such  a  fanciful  system  of  ecclesiastic  polity,  the 
defenders  of  diocesan  Episcopacy  thought  proper  to  distin- 
guish the  members  of  this  college  by  the  title  of  "  Utopian 
bishops."  All  that  we  have  occasion  to  observe  respecting 
a  controversy,  which  was  soon  brought  to  an  end,  is  merely 
this,  and  it  must  have  been  well  known  to  Dr.  Campbell, 
that  none  of  the  writers  from  whom  he  borrowed  the  de- 
nomination, which  he  has  so  derisively  applied,  ever  ex- 
pressed the  least  doubt  of  the  college  bishops,  as  they  were 
called,  having  been  duly  and  regularly  consecrated,  and 
thereby  invested  with  full  powers  for  conveying  to  otherR 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    293 

the  same  gift  or  grace  which  themselves  had  received  by 
imposition  of  hands,  for  the  purpose  of  preserving,  through 
that  dangerous  and  distressful  period,  a  regular  Episcopal 
succession  in  the  church  to  which  they  belonged. 

This  indeed  appears  to  have  been  the  principal  design  of 
all  the  consecrations  which  took  place  in  Scotland  from  the 
revolution,  in  1688,  to  the  death  of  the  last  survivor  of  the 
ejected  bishops,  which  happened  in  1720.     It  was  not  till 
the  number  of  these  prelates  was  reduced  to  five,  and  some 
of  these  also  advanced  in  years,  that  they  saw  the  necessity 
of  making   some   provision  for  continuing  the  Episcopal 
su'-  ession,  and  thereby  preserving  their  national  church 
from  being  again  obliged,  as  she  had  been  within  their 
own  memory,   to  have  recourse  to  another  quarter  for  a 
regular  and  valid  Episcopacy. — Something  of  this  kind  is 
always  alluded  to,   in  the  deeds  or  instruments  of  their 
consecration,   signed   and  sealed   in   the  usual  manner  :* 
And  after  the  first  consecration  was  performed  by  the  arch- 
bishop of  Glasgow,  and  other  two  of  the  deprived  prelates, 
we  find  on  every  subsequent  solemnity  of  the  same  kind, 
some  of  the  new  bishops  assisting  the  old,  as  long  as  any 
of  them   remained,  and   afterwards  acting  in  their  own 
names,  and  by  their  own  powers,  as  prudence  or  necessity 
dictated.     At  the  same  time,  many  considerations  might 
present  themselves  to  show  the  propriety  of  what  was  pro- 
posed, and  cordially  agreed  to  on  both  sides  ;  that  during 
the  life  of  any  of  the  old  bishops,  the  government  of  the 
church  should  remain  entirely  in  their  hands,  whilst  those 
whom  they  had  consecrated  should,  all  that  time,  be  vested 
with  no  diocesan  power,  nor  have  the  inspection  of  any 
particular  district,  but  merely  assist  the  others  in  keeping 
up  the  Episcopal  order,  and  managing  matters  for  the  ge- 
neral good  of  the  church. 

Such  was  the  plan  of  procedure  suggested  by  the  ne- 

*   See  copies  of  them  in  the  Appendix^  No.  II. 


294-    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

cessity  of  the  times,  and  recommended,  no  doubt,  by  va- 
rious circumstances,  as  most  likely  to  answer  the  purpose 
for  which  it  was  adopted. — And  however  unsuitable  and 
improper  it  may  now  appear  to  us,  before  we  can  form  any 
just  or  candid  judgment  of  the  motives  which  gave  rise  to 
it,  we  shall  find  it  necessary  to  look  back  a  little  to  the  state 
of  things  at  that  period,  and  consider  what  might  be  tbe 
sentiments  and  feelings  of  the  bishops  and  clergy  of  the 
lately  established  church,   whom  the  revolution  had   de- 
prived of  their  livings  and  many  valuable  privileges,  had 
reduced  to  the  most  abject  poverty  and  pitiable  distress, 
and  thereby  thrown  into  a  state  of  dependence  on  the  hopes 
of  that  family,  for  the  support  of  whose  interests  they  had 
suffered  this  deprivation,  and  all  these  accumulated  hard- 
ships.    It  is  painful,  even  at  this  distance  of  time,  to  reflect 
on  the  violent  and  barbarous  manner,  in  which  these  un- 
happy sufferers  were  driven  from  their  former  possessions. 
The  remembrance  of  such  strange  and  unexpected  severity 
was  not  likely  to  be  soon  effaced,  and  some  of  the  political 
measures  of  those  times  were  but  ill  adapted  to  conciliate 
the  minds  of  persons,  who  had  so  much  cause,  as  they 
thought,  for  being  disaffected  to  the  established  govern- 
ment.    Hence  it  was  that  the  shattered  remains  of  the  old 
national  church  came  to  be  considered  as  a  society  kept 
together  for  no  other  purpose  than  to  serve  the  interests, 
and  support  the  pretensions  of  the  exiled  family.    On  some 
of  the  principal  friends  of  that  family,  many  of  the  perse- 
cuted clergy  had  been  obliged  to  depend  for  protection  and 
support,  and,  in  consequence  of  that  dependence,  had  been 
much  influenced  by  the  wishes  and  opinions  of  their  pa- 
trons.   It  may  also  be  supposed,  that  some  of  them  would 
retain  as  much  of  the  prevailing  opinion,  respecting  the  ne- 
cessary connection  between  the  mitre  and  the  crown,  as 
might  lead  them  to  suppose,  that  the  church  could  not  pos- 
sibly subsist,  without  admitting  the  same  interposition  of 
regal  authority  in  the  nomination  of  its  bishops,  to  which 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    295 

they  had  been  accustomed  in  the  times  of  constitutional 
and  legal  Episcopacy. 

Viewing  things  in  this  light,  and  encourged,  perhaps 
obliged  to  take  such  measures  as  were  most  agreeable  to 
those  persons  of  rank  and  influence  on  whom  they  de- 
pended, a  part,  though  but  an  inconsiderable  part  of  the 
Scotch  Episcopal  clergy,  contrived  a  new  scheme  for  ma- 
naging the  government  of  their  church,  till  it  should  be 
seen  whether  there  was  any  probability,  as  they,  perhaps, 
might  be  led  to  hope,  from  their  remembrance  of  what 
had  formerly  happened,  of  recovering  her  ancient  privi- 
leges. The  plan  proposed,  of  which  we  have  already  taken 
some  notice,  was  shortly  this  ; — that  after  the  death  of  the 
bishop  of  Edinburgh  (who,  as  we  have  seen,  survived  the 
other  ejected  prelates  till  the  year  1720)  all  the  bishops  who 
had  been  consecrated  since  the  revolution,  and  were  then 
alive,  should  be  formed  into  an  Episcopal  college,  for  the 
general  puipose  of  preserving  a  succession  of  bishops,  and 
ordaining  inferior  clerg)',  but  without  pretending  to  local 
jurisdiction,  or  the  charge  of  any  particular  district,  which, 
as  they  could  not  obtain  with  the  formal  sanction  of  govern- 
ment, they  thought  it  better  to  decline,  out  of  respect  to 
the.  suffering  situation  of  the  person,  whom  they  acknow- 
ledged as  their  kmg.  The  scheme  accordingly  was  no 
sooner  proposed,  than  it  received  his  approbation,  and  on 
this  plan  a  few  promotions  soon  after  took  place,  in  conse- 
quence of  recommendations  from  the  exiled  prince.  But 
notwithstanding  this  shadow  of  support  to  the  collegiate 
scheme  of  church  government,  and  however  proper  or  re- 
spectful to  the  unfortunate  house  of  Stuart,  it  might  have 
appeared  in  the  eyes  of  a  few  individuals,  it  was  far  from 
being  acceptable  to  the  clergy  in  general,  or  giving  any  satis- 
faction to  the  great  body  of  the  laity  who  adhered  to  the 
communion  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church.  They  longed 
for  the  revival  of  diocesan  Episcopacy,  as  that  form  of 
church  government,  to  which  they  had  always  been  accus- 


296    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

tomed,  and  which  they  knew  to  be  most  conformable  to 
the  primitive  model.  They  saw  no  necessity  for  con- 
founding the  things  of  God  with  the  things  of  Caesar  ;  and 
since  it  was  an  undoubted  fact,  that  the  adventitious  privi- 
leges granted  by  the  state,  had  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
grateful  concessions  made  by  the  Christian  church,  they 
considered  that  part  of  it,  to  which  they  belonged,  being 
now  destitute  of  all  secular  support  or  encouragement  from 
the  state,  as  at  full  liberty  to  betake  itself  to  its  own  intrin- 
sic powers,  and  make  what  provision  was  necessary  for  the 
succession  and  continuance  of  its  sacred  orders.  There 
could  be  no  occasion  for  asking  a  licence  from  the  crown 
for  the  election  of  bishops,  who  were  not  to  be  distin- 
guished by  any  mark  of  the  royal  favour,  nor  to  enjoy  any 
peculiar  benefit  for  the  support  of  their  profession.  They 
might  surely  be  promoted  now,  as  they  had  been  of  old, 
before  Christianity  became  a  religion  established  by  law : 
And  where  no  interposition  of  royal  authority,  no  inter- 
ference of  the  state  was  to  be  expected,  as  the  church  was 
left  at  liberty  to  exercise  those  powers  communicated  by 
her  divine  founder  for  preserving  her  in  existence ;  so,  whilst 
this  was  done  in  a  quiet  and  becoming  manner,  there  was 
no  reason  to  fear  that  government  would  be  offended. 

These  were  the  principles  on  which  the  constitution  of 
our  church  was  settled,  as  soon  as  it  recovered  from  the 
shock,  which  was  necessarily  occasioned  by  the  violent  and 
abrupt  termination  of  its  connection  with  the  state.  And 
if  some  of  our  writers,  whom  Dr.  Campbell  calls  the 
"  warmest  partizans  of  our  sect,  have  not  scrupled  to  own, 
that  at  the  death  of  the  bishop  of  Edinburgh  in  1720,  all 
the  dioceses  in  Scotland  were  become  vacant," — ytt  it  can 
never  be  supposed,  that  these  writers  believed  the  whole 
Episcopal  church  in  Scotland  to  have  become  so  far  vacant 
likewise,  as  to  have  no  bishops  in  it  capable  of  being  elected 
to  take  the  charge  of  its  several  districts,  or  of  consecrat- 
ing others,  that  might  be  elected  for  that  purpose. — This 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Epise&pacy  of  Scotland.    f^X 

was  a  sort  of  vacancy,  which  none  of  our  writers  ever  did^ 
or  could  acknowledge  ;  because  they  all  knew  well,  that 
when  that  event  happened,  which  occasioned  this  "  dioce- 
san vacancy,"  there  were  no  fewer  than  six  of  those  bi- 
shops alive,  who  had  been  consecrated  since  the  revolu- 
tion, and  whom  they  always  owned  to  be  real  bishops^  in 
the  true  and  primitive  sense  of  the  word.  And  they  knew 
likewise,  that  in  less  than  two  months  after  the  death  of  the 
bishop  of  Edinburgh,  the  presbyters  of  that  diocese,  which 
had  once  been  legally  and  constitutionally  under  his  inspect 
lion,  unanimously  elected  one  of  the  above-mentioned  six 
bishops  to  be  their  diocesan  ;  and  not  long  after,  the  pres- 
byters of  Angus  elected  another  of  them,  and  those  of 
Aberdeen  a  third,*  for  the  same  Episcopal  charge  of  these 
several  districts.  It  can  hardly  ht  supposed,  diat  all  these 
presbyters,  who  had  been  bred  for  the  ministiy,  and  regu- 
Harly  ordained  in  an  Episcopal  church,  would  be  so  unac» 
quainted  with  ecclesiastical  history,  and  the  canons  of  an- 
cient councils,  as  to  make  choice  of  persons  for  their  bi- 
shops, who  by  being  ordained  at  large,  might  have  assumed 
the  name,  but  had  no  just  right  to  die  character  of  bishops, 
and  to  whose  first  ordination  as  presbyters,  "  their  farcical 
consecration,"  as  Dr.  Campbell  thought  proper  to  call  it, 
"  by  Doctor  Ross  and  others,  added  nothing  at  all."  Is  k 
to  be  imagined,  that  so  many  respectable  and  experienced 
clergymen  would  have  joined  in  countenancing  and  abet- 
ting such  a  ridiculous,  we  may  say  even  impious  farce  ;  or 
have  suffered  the  government  of  their  church,  and  the 
management  of  its  affairs,  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  persons 
who  had  obtained  their  promotion  by  such  irregular  and 
unjustifiable  means  ?  Yet  no  remonstrance  appeared  against 
it ;  nothing  indeed  was  seen  but  a  general  approbation  of  the 
measure  which  had  thus  restored  the  true  diocesan  Epis*- 


*  See  Skinner's  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  p,  625,  629, 

530. 

38 


298    'Particular  Defence  of  the  episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

€opacy ;  and  a  few  years  after,  the  whole  Episcopal  church 
in  Scotland  was  settled  on  the  same  right  and  orderh'  plan, 
and  certain  regulations  adopted,  which  have  continued  to 
be  the  standard  of  its  discipline  to  this  day.^ 

We  have  been  obliged  to  be  thus  particular  in  our  detail 
of  facts,  as  the  best  way  of  repelling  that  strange,  unex- 
pected attack,  which  has  lately  been  made  on  the  validity 
of  our  Episcopal  orders,  and  which,  v/e  have  seen,  has 
nothing  to  support  it,  but  the  novelty  of  the  arguments  by 
which  it  is  maintained,  and  the  peremptory  manner  in 
which  they  are  brought  forward.  If  the  refutation  of  them 
required  any  addition  to  that  clear,  satisfactory  evidence, 
which  has  been  already  produced,  we  might  easily  find  it 
in  the  writings  of  some  of  the  most  learned  and  distin- 
guished divines  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  have  af- 
forded most  abundant  testimony  in  favour  of  such  a  sound 
and  primitive  Episcopacy,  as  that  which  still  subsists  in 
Scotland.  And  when  this  point  came  to  be  debated  in  the 
upper  house  of  Parliament,  and  a  discussion  took  place  on 
the  nature  of  our  Episcopal  succession  as  far  back  as  the 
year  1748,  the  whole  English  bench  unanimously  opposed 
the  passing  of  an  act,  which  seemed  to  infringe  the  validity 
of  our  orders  ;  and  some  of  them  argued  against  it  in  the 
strongest  terms,  particularly  the  learned  and  pious  Dr. 
Seeker,  then  bishop  of  Oxford,  and  afterwards  archbishop 
of  Canterbur}',  who,  in  his  speech  on  that  occasion,  ob- 
served, that  "  to  preserve  the  Episcopal  church  of  Scotland, 
the  bishops,  who  were  outed  of  their  temporalities  at  the 

*  Agreeably  to  these  regulations,  every  bishop  is  elected  by  the  whole 
body  of  clergy,  within  the  diocese  or  district  over  which  he  is  to  preside, 
and  they  meet  for  such  election,  in  virtue  of  a  inandate  signed  by  at  least 
a  majority  of  the  bishops.  When  the  election  is  over,  the  issue  of  it 
is  reported  by  the  dean  of  the  diocese  to  the  primus,  or  senior  bishop, 
who  communicates  it  to  his  colleagues,  and  they  jointly  appoint  a  day 
and  place  for  the  consecration  of  the  person  elected,  which  is  always 
performed  by  three  bishops  at  least,  in  a  public  chapel,  and  according 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    299 

revolution,  not  only  conferred  orders,  but  consecrated  bi- 
shops in  the  room  of  those  that  died  ;  for  surely,"  said  he, 
"  the  Episcopal  party  in  Scotland  have  as  much  a  right  and 
a  power  to  both  the  one  and  the  other,  as  the  primitive 
Christians  had,  before  their  religion  came  to  be  the  esta- 
blished religion  in  any  countr}^,  and  if  they  would  profess 
and  practise  the  same  submission  to  the  civil  gbvemmdnt, 
I  should  think  them  equally  entitled  to  protection  and  indul- 
gence."* 

Another  more  recent  occurrence  was  the  means  of  pro- 
curing a  similar  acknowledgment  in  favour  of  our  Episco- 
pacy from  that  branch  of  the  church  of  England  ^vhich 
was  long  cherished  in  the  British  plantations  of  North- 
America,  but  could  never  obtain,  till  it  was  torn  from  the 
parent  flock,  that  which  would  have  given  it  additional  life 
and  vigour,  a  regular  and  resident  Episcopate.  In  an  excel- 
lent discour&e  on  this  subject,  preached  in  Virginia,  in  the 
year  1771,  the  author  makes  this  introductory  remark,— 
*'  It  was  (I  believe)  about  the  middle  of  the  last  century, 
that  our  want  of  bishops  was  sensibly  felt  and  lamented, 
jand  that  applications  for  remedying  the  evil  were  made 
to  the  throne.  These  applications  were  thought  so  reason- 
able, that  under  Charles  the  second,  a  patent  was  actually 
made  out  for  appointing  a  bishop  of  Virginia,  By  some 
fatality  or  other  (such  as  seems  for  ever  to  have  pursued  all 
the  good  measures  of  the  monarchs  of  that  unfortunate 
family)  the  patent  was  not  signed  when  the  king  died  ;  and 
from  that  time  to  this,  all  exertions  for  the  attainment  of 
this  desirable  object,  though  they  have  never  wholly  ceased, 
have  been  as  languid,  as  the  opposition  to  them  has  been 
vehement.  Never  before  in  any  period  of  our  history,  or 
in  any  part  of  the  empire,  was  a  measure  so  harmless,  so 
necessary,  and  so  salutary,  resisted  and  defeated  on  grounds 
$0  frivolous,  so  unwise,  and  so  unjust."    Our  author  then 

*  See  the  Scots  Magazine  for  1748,  p.  589,  590. 


SOO    Partiaulaf'  Defence  Gftke  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

proceeds  to  mention,  and  answer  very  fully  all  the  objec- 
tions, which  had  been  made  to  this  wise  and  salutary  mea^ 
Sliire  ;  and  in  an  appendix  which  he  subjoined  to  this  dis- 
course, when  it  was  published  with  some  others  in  the  year 
1797^  he  concludes  with  these  very  just  and  pertinent  ob- 
servations—- 

*'  That  the  American  opposition  to  Episcopacy  was  at  aQ 
connected  with  that  still  more  serious  one,  so  soon  after* 
wards  set  up  against  civil  government,  was  not  indeed 
generally  apparent  at  the  time,  but  it  is  now  indisputable, 
as  it  also  is,  that  the  former  contributed  not  a  little  to  render 
the  latter  successful.  The  Anti-Episcopalians  carried  theit 
point  with  an  high  hand,  which  is  no  otherwise  to  be  ac- 
counted for,  than  that  the  party,  in  perfect  union  with  their 
fellow  labourers  in  the  British  parliament,  were  in  the 
habit  of  opposing  every  measure  that  seemed  likely  to 
strengthen  the  hands  of  government.  That  the  object, 
which  in  this  instance  was  opposed,  was  either  in  itself 
really  dangerous,  or  intended  to  be  so,  will  not  now  ht 
pretended  by  any  one :  For  hardly  was  the  independence 
6f  the  colonies  gained,  before  an  Episcopate  was  applied 
for  and  obtained  j"*  an  Episcopate,  in  every  respect  simi- 
lar to  that  which  had  often  and  earnestly  been  requested 
by  the  English  clergy  in  America ;  that  is,  bishops  duly 
authorized  to  perform  the  original  duties  of  their  office,  to 
ordain  and  govern  the  clergy,  and  administer  the  sacred 
rite  of  confirmation,  but  without  any  temporal  power  or 
preferment,  and  possessed  of  no  other  authority  than  that 


•  See  "  A  View  <)f  the  Causes  and  Concequcnces  of  the  American  Revolu- 
iiotty  m  thirteen  Discourses,  preached  in  Nortli-America,  between  the 
years  1763  and  1775 — with  an  historical  preface,  by  Jonathan  Boucher, 
A.  M.  and  F.  A.  S. — Vicar  of  Epsom  in  the  county  of  Surry,  London. 
1797"  A  work  which  does  equal  credit  to  its  author,  by  the  soundness 
of  the  principles  which  it  inculcates,  both  in  religion  and  politics,  and  by 
the  manner  in  which  they  are  enforced,  from  the  authority  of  divine 
revelation. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    301 

which  is  derived  from  the  church  and  not  from  the  state, 
being  of  a  purely  spiritual  and  ecclesiastical  nature. 

This  was  the  Episcopacy  which  was  first  communicated 
to  the  American  church  in  the  state  of  Connecticut,  in  the 
person  of  Dr.  Samuel  Seabury,  one  of  the  missionaries 
from  the  society  for  propagating  the  gospel  in  foreign  parts  y 
and  a  suffering  loyalist  during  the  American  war,  who 
having  brought  with  him  the  most  ample  attestations  of  his 
character  and  qualifications,  both  from  the  clergy  of  Con- 
necticut, and  those  of  the  neighbouring  state  of  New-York^ 
was  consecrated  by  the  bishops  in  Scotland  in  the  year 
1784,  and  some  years  after  joined  with,  and  assisted  the 
bishops  who  received  consecration  at  Lambeth,  in  giving  a 
bishop  to  the  protestant  Episcopal  church  in  the  state  of 
Maryland,  and  in  other  business  that  came  before  what  is 
called  the  House  of  Bishops  in  Anierica."^  This  happy  co- 
alition, in  forming  and  establishing  the  constitution  of  the 
church  in  the  United  American  States,  was  justly  consi- 
dered by  those  who  had  a  hand  in  promoting  it,  as  the  best 
means  of  uniting  them  also  in  doctrine,  discipline  and  wor-» 
ship ;  whilst  it  exhibits  that  becoming  desire,  and  resolution 
to  maintain  a  Christian  fellowship  and  communion  with 
the  Episcopal  church  in  this  country,  which  must  ever  be 
regarded  as  a  public  acknowledgment  on  their  part,  of  the 
validity  of  our  orders,  and  the  regularity  of  that  Episcopal 
succession,  from  which  they  are  derived. 

*  This  appears  from  a  "  'Journal  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Bishops, 
Clergy,  and  Laity  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States 
cf  Atnerica,  in  a  contiention  held  in  the  city  of  Kevj-Tork,  in  September, 
1792"  In  which  journal  it  is  mentioned,  that  Bishop  Seabury  preached 
by  appointment,  at  the  opening  of  the  convention,  and  afterwards  as- 
sisted Bishops  Provoost,  White,  and  Madison,  in  the  consecration  of  Dr. 
Clagget,  as  bishop  of  the  church  in  Maryland.  "  In  1793,  Bishop 
Seabury  published  at  New-York,  two  volumes  of  discourses,  which  are 
such  as  might  have  brought  credit  to  any  prelate,  in  any  age,  and  in  any 
country."  He  died  in  February,  1796,  and  for  a  character  of  him,  see 
Mr.  Boucher's  work,  mentioned  in  the  preceding  note,  p.  5S&,  and  also 
the  obituary  of  ibe  Genikman's  Magazine  for  May,  1797,  p.  442. 


302    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland* 

On  this  point,  therefore,  we  presume,  it  would  be  super- 
fluous to  add  any  thing  more  to  that  abundant  evidence, 
which  has  been  already  produced,  and  which,  we  would 
hope,  must  be  considered  as  perfectly  sufficient  to  show, 
how  little  ground  Dr.  Campbell  had  for  making  use  of  such 
a  contemptuous  and  vilifying  comparison,  as  that  which  he 
laid  before  his  pupils,  in  the  following  passage  of  his 
eleventh  lecture.  "  Let  no  true  son  of  our  church  be 
offended,  that  I  acknowledge  our  nonjurors  to  have  a  sort 
of  Presbyterian  ordination;"  (alluding  to  what  he  had 
said  just  before,  of  the  present  Scotch  Episcopal  clergy 
having  their  ordination  solely  from  presbyters)  "  for  I 
would  by  no  means  be  understood  as  equalizing  theirs 
to  that  which  obtains  with  us.  Whoever  is  ordained 
amongst  us,  is  ordained  a  bishop  by  a  class  of  bishops. 
It  is  true,  we  neither  assume  the  titles,  nor  enjoy  the  re- 
venues, of  the  dignified  clergy,  so  denominated  in  other 
countries ;  but  we  are  not  the  less  bishops  in  every  thing 
essential,  for  being  more  conformable  to  the  apostolic  and 
primitive  model,  when  every  bishop  had  but  one  parish, 
one  congregation,  one  church  or  place  of  common  wor- 
ship, one  altar  or  communion  table,  and  was  perhaps  as 
poor  as  any  of  us.  Whereas  the  ordination  of  our  non- 
jurors proceeds  from  presbyters  in  their  own  (that  is,  in 
the  worst)  sense  of  the  word,  men  to  whom  a  part  only  of 
the  ministerial  powers  was  committed,  and  from  whom 
particularly  was  withheld  the  right  of  transmitting  orders 
to  others.  When  we  say  that  our  orders  are  from  presby- 
ters, we  do  not  use  the  term  in  their  acceptation,  but  in 
that,  wherein  we  find  it  used  by  Luke,  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  by  Paul  in  his  epistles,  and  (if  the  name  of 
fathers  be  thought  to  add  any  weight)  by  the  purest  and 
earliest  fathers,  Clemens  Romanus,  Polycarp,  and  others, 
presbyters,  in  short,  whom  the  Holy  Ghost  had  made  bi- 
shops of  the  flock.  But  when  we  say,  their  orders  arc 
from  presbyters,  we  use  the  word  not  in  the  apostolicjilj 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    30J 

but  in  the  more  recent  sense,  for  a  sort  of  subordinate  mi- 
nisters, who  are  not  authorized  to  ordain,  and  who,  on 
Dr.  Hammond's  hypothesis,  as  well  as  ours,  were  not  ori-  ^ 
ginalh'  in  the  church." 

On  a  calm,  candid,  and  attentive  perusal  of  the  forego- 
ing passage,  we  can  hardly  refrain  from  asking  even  after 
the  manner,  which  some  perhaps  will  not  think  over-polite, 
of  one  of  the  reviewers  of  these  lectures — "  Is  this  the 
language  and  reasoning  of  Dr.  Campbell,  the  justly  cele- 
brated author  of  the  Dissertatio7i  on  Miracles^  and  of  the 
valuable  work,  entitled.  The  Philosophy  of  Rhetoric  ?  So 
says  the  editor,  and  we  dare  not  contradict  him  ;  but  it 
is  such  reasoning  as  would  disgrace  a  school-boy  who  had 
ever  looked  into  a  treatise  of  logic."*  Let  us  examine  it 
a  little,  with  all  the  impartiality  which  can  be  expected 
from  persons,  whose  right  to  the  true  clerical  character  is 
held  forth  by  it  in,  what  must  appear  to  them,  the  most 
pitiful  and  degrading  light.  Had  it  even  been  acknowledged, 
that  they  had  real  genuine  presbyterian  ordination,  per- 
haps they  v/ould  not  have  thought  themselves  very  highly 
complimented  ;  but  to  bring  them  down  to  something,  di- 
minutively represented  as  only  a  sort  of  presbyterian  or- 
dination, is  truly  humiliating,  and  would  require  much 
more  strength  of  argument  than  Dr.  Campbell  has  thought 
fit  to  produce  for  effecting  such  a  bold  depression  of  our 
Episcopal  orders.  Endeavouring  to  show  the  superior  au- 
thority of  the  orders  of  presbyterians,  he  indeed  affirms, 
but  affirmation  is  not  proof,  "  that  whoever  is  ordained 
amongst  them,  is  ordained  a  bishop  by  a  class  of  bishops." 
If  then  there  be  any  regard  due  to  succession  at  all,  may  it 
not  be  asked,  what  class  of  bishops  ordained  bishop  Calvin 
at  Geneva,  or  bishop  Knox  in  Scotland?  The  former,  as  far 
as  appears  from  his  history,  never  had  ordination  of  any  kind, 
tliough  few  bishops  ever  assumed  more  of  the  Episcopal 

*  See  Anti-yacobirr  Revh-v  for  July,  1801,  p.  246 


304-    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

power  than  he  did ;  and  the  latter,  if  he  received  any  or- 
ders at  all,  which  seems  to  be  very  uncertain,  yet  could  only 
have  been  ordained  a  presbyter,  or  one  of  those  to  whom, 
even  by  our  Professor's  own  account  "  a  part  only  of  the 
ministerial  powers  was  committed,  and  from  whom  was 
particularly  v/ithheld  the  right  of  transmitting  orders  to 
Others."  How  then  could  he  or  any  of  the  class  of  pres- 
byters at  the  reformation,  take  upon  them  to  transmit  to 
others  what  themselves  had  not  received ;  or  pretend  to  ex- 
ercise a  right,  which  had  been  always,  by  divine  institu- 
tion, withheld  from  the  office  to  which  they  had  been  ap- 
pointed ? 

Were  it  however  to  be  granted,  in  contradiction  to  the 
clearest  evidence  of  scripture  and  antiquity,  that  bishops 
and  presbyters  being  originally  of  the  same  order,  no  dis- 
tinction ought  ever  to  have  been  made  between  them,  nor 
any  exclusive  powers  assigned  to  the  one,  more  than  to  the 
other  ;  yet,  as  Dr.  Campbell  allows,  that  "  those  men,  who 
came  under  the  hands  of  Bishop  Ross,  had  been  regularly 
admitted  ministers  or  presbyters^  before  the  revolution, 
and  that  the  orders  of  the  present  Scotch  Episcopal  clergy 
are  derived  from  these  presbyters,"  we  may  submit  to  the 
judgment  of  any  unprejudiced  person,  whether  the  ordi- 
nation of  those  clergy  be  not  in  every  respect  as  valid  as 
that  of  any  other  body  of  men  who  derive  their  orders  only 
from  presbyters,  and  much  more  so  than  that  which  can  be 
traced  to  no  source  of  ecclesiastical  power  at  all,  but  owes 
its  origin  solely  to  the  appointment  of  the  people,  or  the  au- 
thority of  the  civil  magistrate.  In  a  case  so  plain,  and 
where  the  premises  are  so  clear,  it  might  have  been 
thought,  that  the  conclusion  would  be  equally  obvious,  and 
that  no  "  true  son"  of  a  presbyterian  church,  would  ever 
have  objected  to  amj  sort  of,  what  is  really,  presbyterian 
ordination,  or  made  any  difference  between  the  powers  of 
those  presbyters,  who  were  surely  all  alike  subordinate 
ministers  as  well  before,  as  at  the  time  of  the  reformation; 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Eplscopaey  of  Scotland,    3Q5 

and  who  could  not  since  have  acquired  a  right  to  change 
the  inherent  nature  of  their  powers,  or  to  make  themselves 
a  different  order  from  what  they  were  originally  intended 
to  be.  Yet  Dr.  Campbelljias  found  out  a  distinction  be* 
tween  our  acceptation  of  the  word  *'  presbyters,"  which  he 
calls  not  only  a  "  more  recent,"  but  the  '*  worst  sense"  of 
it,  and  the  "  apostolical,"  which  is  no  doubt  the  best  sense 
in  which  he  uses  it ;  as  if  the  difference  between  his  sense 
of  the  word  and  ours  could  make  any  difference  in  the 
nature  of  the  office,  or  render  it  better  to  him  and  worse 
to  us,  according  to  the  sense  in  which  it  is  taken.  This 
seems  to  be  just  the  same  as  adopting  the  popular  argu- 
ment of  the  Romish  doctors  in  recommending  their  tran«* 
substantiation,  "  crede  quod  habes,  et  habes,"  believe  that 
you  hav^e,  and  you  have  it.  Let  a  man  but  believe,  that 
he  possesses  any  office,  or  that  the  office  which  he  possesses 
has  particular  powers  assigned  to  it,  and  nothing  more  is 
necessary  to  put  him  in  possession  either  of  the  one  or  the 
other.  The  absurdity  here  is  the  same,  as  if  a  subaltern  in 
the  army  should  take  the  command  of  a  regiment,  because 
he  believes  himself  to  be  as  much  an  officer  as  his  colonel, 
or  a  justice  of  the  peace  assume  the  powers  of  the  Lord 
High  Chancellor,  because  they  are  both  judges. 

When  Dr.  Campbell  presumed  that  his  orders  were  better 
than  those  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  clergy,  because  theirs 
were  only  from  presbyters,  as  "  a  sort  of  subordinate  mi- 
nisters who  are  not  authorized  to  ordain,"  whereas  his 
were  from  "  presbyters  in  the  acceptation  used  by  Luke, 
by  Paul,  by  Clemens  Romanus,  Polycarp,  and  others  of 
the  purest  and  earliest  fathers  ;  presbyters,  in  short,  whom 
the  Holy  Ghost  had  made  bishops  of  the  flock  ;"*^  all  this 
amounts  to  nothing  more  than  bare,  bold  presumption, 
without  the  least  appearance  of  proof.  He  could  not  but 
Jcnow,  that  we  never  pretended  to  deny  the  power  of  the 

*  Lecture  xi. 
39 


30&    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland 

Holy  Ghost  to  make  bishops  of  the  flock,  not  only  of  pres- 
byters, but  even  of  deacons  and  laymen  too,  if  he  was 
pleased  so  to  do.     This,  however,  we  are  sure,  was  never 
done  in  the  ordinary  way,  but  by  a  more  certain  and  evi- 
dent mode  of  appointment  than  any  inward  "  conscious- 
ness," or  mere  effect  of  fancy,  which  yet  appears  to  be  all 
that  our  Professor  had  to  support  him,  when  he  thus  at- 
tacked the  pious  and  learned  Dodwell.^ — "  I  have  stronger 
evidence  that  you  have  no  mission,  than  all  your  traditions, 
and  antiquities,  and  catalogues  will  ever  be  able  to  sur- 
mount."   And  what  is  this  evidence,  which  must  be  strong 
indeed,  to  set  aside  all  these  means  of  ascertaining  a  divine 
mission,  which  have  been  so  long  and  generally  received  J 
We  have  all  that  is  brought  forward  against  them  in  what 
immediately  follows — ^'  For  if  he,  whom  God  sendeth, 
speaketh  the  words  of  God,  (and  this  is  a  test  which  Christ 
himself  hath  given  us)  he  who  contradicteth  God's  words 
is  not  sent  by  him."     And  by  this  rule  it  is,  that  all  the 
pretenders  to  "  mission,"  even  the  wildest  of  our  modern 
missionaries,  endeavour  to  justify  their  pretensions  on  the 
ground  of  their  "  speaking  the  words  of  God,"  of  which 
they,  no  doubt,  think  themselves  the  best  judges.     On  this 
ground,  too,  our  learned  Professor  might  have  saved  him- 
self a  great  deal  of  the  trouble  he  took  in  seeking  for  other 
arguments  to  run  down  the  orders  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal 
clergy,  since  all  he  had  to  do  was  barely  to  affirm,  that  they 
"  contradict  God's  words," — ^therefore,  they  have  no  mis- 
sion.   It  was  likewise  quite  unnecessary,  in  arguing  against 
the  pretensions  of  these  clerg}^,  that  he  should  take  any  pe- 
culiar merit  to  himself  and  his  brethren,  on  account  of  their 
"  not  assuming  the  titles  nor  enjoying  the  revenues  of  the 
dignified  clergy,  so  denominated  in  other  countries,  al- 
though they  are  not  the  less  bishops  in  every  thing  essen- 
tial,  for  being  more  conformable  to  the  apostolical  and  pri- 

*  Lecture  iv. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    Z07 

mltive  model ;"  since  he  knew  very  well  that  the  Scotch 
Episcopal  clergy  were  as  destitute  of  tides  or  revenues  as 
he  could  pretend  to  be ;  and  however  he  might  have  wished 
to  sneer  at  the  "  dignified  clergy  in  other  countries,"  yet 
when  he  condescended  to  compare  his  own  church  with 
*'  our  sect,"  the  only  question  was,  which  of  these  two  was 
most  "  conformable  to  the  apostolical  and  primitive  mo- 
del." It  is  by  this  conformity  that  we  think  ourselves  at 
present  peculiarly  distinguished,  in  all  the  instances  of  unity 
which  he  has  mentioned,  as  they  were  understood  in  the 
language,  and  explained  by  the  practice  of  the  truly  apos- 
tolical church.  And  if  his  comparative  '^  poverty"  be  any 
just  mark  of  ^'  conformity  to  the  primitive  model,"  it  will 
not  be  easy  to  deny  the  preference  in  this  respect  to  the  pre- 
sent Scotch  Episcopal  church,  of  whose  ministers  it  may 
not  improperly  be  said,  in  the  language  of  an  apostie,  that 
they  are  "  as  poor,  yet  making  many  rich,  as  having  no- 
thing" that  can  be  called  temporal,  and  settled  revenue, 
"  yet  possessing  all  things"  that  pertain  to  spiritual  or 
Christian  edification.^ 

But  there  is  still  something  farther  to  be  said  in  sup- 
port of  the  validity  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  orders,  when 
thus  drawn  into  a  comparison  with  that  sort  of  presbyterian 
ordination,  which  obtains  under  the  establishment  of  this 


*  It  cannot  be  thought  impertinent  to  mention  here  an  anecdote  recorded 
in  the  life  of  that  truly  "  dignified  clergyman,"  the  late  Dr.  Home,  bishop 
of  Norwich,  who,  his  biographer  says — "  from  the  present  circumstances 
of  its  primitive  orthodoxy,  piety,  poverty,  and  depressed  state,  had 
such  an  opinion  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  as  to  think,  that  if  the 
great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  were  upon  earth,  and  it  were  put  to  his 
choice  with  what  denomination  of  Christians  he  would  communicate,  the 
preference  would  probably  be  given  to  the  Episcopalians  of  Scotland,  as 
r.iost  like  to  the  people  he  had  been  used  to."  See  life  of  Dr.  Home,  in 
Mr.  Jones'  Works,  vol.  x'n.  p.  176.  It  can  give  no  offence,  we  hope, 
tluis  to  state  a  President  of  Magdalen  College  in  Oxford,  over  against 
a  Principal  of  Marischal  College  in  Aberdeen,  as  at  least  equally  com- 
petent to  Judge  in  matters  of  apostolical  conformity. 


;>08    Particular  Defmce  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScottmist* 

countn^  where  every  one  that  is  oruained  by  the  esta- 
bhshed  rules,  Dr.  Campbell  says,  "  is  ordained  a  bishop 
by  a  class  of  bishops."  He  had  also  before  laid  it  down 
as  an  invariable  maxim,  that  the  name  hhhop^  which 
means  overseer^  cannot  with  any  propriety  be  applied  to 
any  person,  who  has  nothing  to  oversee,  and,  therefore, 
^' a  bishop  continues  a  bishop  only  whilst  he  continues 
to  have  people  under  his  spiritual  care."  Dr.  Campbell, 
then,  having  been  ordained  a  bishop,  or  what  was  the 
same  with  him,  a  minister,  could  only  continue  to  be  so, 
whilst  he  had  people  under  his  ministry  or  spiritual  care. 
Yet  we  are  told  by  his  biographer,  that  in  June,  1795y 
finding  himself,  no  doubt,  as  his  letter  expresses  it- — *^  pro- 
videntially in  a  situation  of  living  independently  of  the 
emoluments  of  office,"  he  resigned  his  chiirge  of  minister 
of  Grey-friars'  church,  as  well  as  that  of  Professor  of  Di- 
vinity in  Pflarischal  College,  into  the  hands  of  the  presby- 
tery of  Aberdeen,  "  entreating  them  to  declare  him  re- 
leased in  future  from  these  functions,  and  the  pastoral  re* 
lation  implied  in  them  loosed ;"  with  a  caution,  however, 
against  any  misconstruction  of  his  meaning  expressed  in 
these  words — .'-*  I  hope  I  shall  not  be  misunderstood  by 
any  to  mean,  by  this  deed,  a  resignation  of  the  character 
of  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  and  servant  of  Christ.  In 
this  character  I  glory,  so  far  am  I  from  intending  to  re- 
sign it  but  with  my  breath;  nor  do  I  mean  to  retain  it  only 
as  a  title.  For  if,  by  the  blessing  of  God,  I  should  yet  be 
able  to  do  any  real  service,  either  in  defence,  or  in  illus- 
tration of  the  Christian  cause,  I  shall  think  it  my  honour, 
as  well  as  my  dut}^,  and  the  highest  gratification  of  which 
I  am  capable,  to  be  so  employed.  It  is  only  from  the  par- 
ticular relation  to  the  people  of  Aberdeen  as  pastor^  and  the 
theological  students  of  Marischal  College,  as  teacher,  that 
it  is  my  desire  to  be  loosed,""^ 

*  See  the  Account  of  his  Life  and  Writings  prefixed  to  his  Lectures. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.  309 

The  reader  perhaps  will  be  a  little  surprized  to  find  in 
^is  letter,  some  regard  expressed  for  that  very  thing  called 
*'  character^"*  in  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  which  the  same 
person,  in  his  Lectui'es,  has  treated  with  so  much  pointed 
scorn  and  disrespect.     But  what  we  are  chiefly  concerned 
to  lay  hold  of,  is  the  very  appropriate  weapon,  w^hich  is 
here  put  into  our  hands,  for  defending  the  validity  of  our 
orders,  against  the  only  blow  which  Dr.  Campbell  could 
find  the  means  of  aiming  at  them.     His  peculiar  attack  on 
the  Scotch  Episcopal  clergy,  we  have  seen,  is  wholly  sup- 
ported by  his  pretending,  that  they  derive  their  orders  from 
''  bishops  merely  nominal;",  and  that  these  bishops  were 
thus  "  merely  nominal,"  because  they  received  no  particu- 
lar assignment  to  any  Episcopal  charge,  for  want  of  which 
he  does  not  scruple  to  call  their  consecration  farcical^  or 
of  no  signification.      Had  he  been  now  alive,  we  should 
certainly  have  wished  to  ask  him,  what  material  difference 
there  is,  between  a  man's  retaining  the  title  after  resigning 
the  charge,  and  accepting  of  the  title  at  first  without  the 
charge  t     We  see  him  announcing  himself  to  be  a  bishop 
or  pastor,  ordained  by  a  class  of  the  same  kind,  and  by 
that  very  ordination,  assigned  and  bound  to  a  particular 
pastoral  charge,  without  which,  by  his  own  account,  he  can 
no  longer  continue  to  be  a  bishop,  pastor,  or  minister ;  yet 
from  that  charge  he  desires  to  be  released,  and  to  have  his 
pastoral  relation  to  it  loosed,  but  still  means  to  retain  his 
character  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  and  is  willing  "  to  be 
employed  either  in  defending  or  illustrating  the  Christian 
cause,  as  far  as  he  is  able,"  v/hich  can  only  mean  his  doing 
it,  as  a  minister,  bishop  or  pastor.     And  what  is  all  this 
but  intending  to  act  as  a  bishop  ordained  at  large  ;  to  be  a 
pastor  without  a  flock,  a  minister  without  having  any  peo- 
ple under  his  ministerial  or  spiritual  care,  and  to  continue 
a  bishop,  even  when  he  had  no  charge  to  oversee  or  in- 
spect ?     If  then  in  this  assumed  character,  he  had  pre- 
tended to  baptize  a  child,  or  administer  the  sacrament  of 


310    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

the  Lord's  supper,  or  assist  a  class  of  bishops  in  ordaining 
a  bishop,  must  not  every  thing  of  this  kind,  on  his  own  prin- 
ciples, have  been  no  better  than  a  farcical  ceremony,  per- 
formed by  one  who  had  no  power  or  right  to  perform  any 
such  office,  being  in  fact,  no  other  than  a  bishop,  pastor  or 
minister  "  merely  nominal  ?"  But  as  Dr»  Campbell,  no 
doubt,  would  have  spurned  at  the  idea  of  acting  in  such  a 
fictitious  character,  why  was  he  so  ready,  without  just 
ground,  to  apply  the  same  censure  to  others,  and  to  hold  up 
to  contempt,  as  bishops  "  merely  nominal,"  those  who  had 
surely  as  good  a  right  to  be  esteemed  real  and  true  bishops, 
as  he  had,  even  by  his  own  way  of  arguing,  to  be  consi- 
dered as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  after  he  had  resigned  his 
pastoral  charge,  and  so  renounced  the  only  title  he  could 
have,  by  his  own  principles,  to  that  official  character? — If 
he  wished  to  retain  such  a  character  only  on  the  supposi- 
tion of  his  still  "  being  able  to  do  some  service  either  in 
defence,  or  in  illustration  of  the  Christian  cause,"  the  same 
privilege  might  have  been  allowed  to  those  whom  he  thought 
proper  to  call "  nominal  bishops,"  many  of  whom  well  could, 
and  some  of  them  actually  did  defend  and  illustrate  what 
they  believed  to  be  the  Christian  cause,  and  on  that  foot- 
ing, might  certainly  claim,  as  well  as  Dr.  Campbell,  to  be 
considered  as,  what  they  really  were,  bishops  of  the  Chris- 
tian church.  We  offer  this  reasoning  merely  in  return  to 
the  Doctor's  "  argumentum  ad  hominem,"  and  to  show 
how  much  his  practice,  in  the  affair  of  his  resignation, 
"  militated  against  his  principles."  If  he  was  at  so  much 
pains  to  condemn  us,  as  he  thought,  on  our  own  principles, 
it  is  but  fair  that  we  should  be  allowed  to  make  use  of  his 
principles,  as  far  as  we  can,  in  our  own  vindication. 

It  is  entirely  for  the  purpose  of  vindicating  ovirselves, 
that  we  have  been  so  long  detained,  and  obliged  to  make 
so  many  remarks,  on  the  lecture  no^v  before  us,  which 
appears  to  have  been  wholly  levelled  at,  what  the  Lecturer 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    311 

calls*  "  a  pretty  numerous  class,  and  these  not  all  Roman- 
ists :"  By  which  description  we  may  easily  perceive,  that 
he  means  the  class  whom  he  had,  twice  in  this  lecture,  dis- 
tinguished by  the  obnoxious  title  of  "  our  nonjurors^"*  al- 
though in  a  former  lecture  he  had  candidly  owned,  "  that 
we  have  none  of  that  description  at  present."  That  some 
kind  of  reflection  was  intended  by  this  appellation,  may  at 
least  be  suspected,  from  his  always  applying  it  as  a  mark 
of  distinction,  without  any  reference  to  the  political  senti- 
ments which  gave  rise  to  it,  and  particularly  from  the  abuse 
which  he  pours  out,  with  an  unusual  flow  of  acrimony,  on 
a  most  learned  and  distinguished  writer,  whom  he  after- 
wards introduces  to  our  notice,  as  "  a  zealous  defender  of 
prelacy,"  and  what  is  worse,  by  the  opprobrious  designa- 
tion of"  the  Irish  nonjuror  ^  Dodwell,"t  distinguishing  those 
who  maintain  that  Episcopal  ordination  is  necessary  to  the 
valid  administration  of  the  sacraments  of  our  religion,  by 
the  title  of  "  Dodxvellians  ;"J  as  if  this  were  a  doctrine 
peculiar  to  nonjurors^  and  therefore  so  zealously  maintained 
by  Dodwell. 

A  similar  intention  is  too  obvious  to  escape  notice  in  the 
treatment  which  our  Lecturer  bestows  on  another  no  less 

*  Lecture  xi. 

f  Page  96 — 122.  This  great  and  good  man  had,  no  doubt,  many  sin- 
gularities of  opinion,  but  none  that  could  justify  such  abusive  epithets  as 
these — "  Arrogant  and  vain  man  !  What  are  you,  who  so  boldly  and 
avowedly  presume  to  foist  into  God's  covenant,  articles  of  your  own  de- 
vising, neither  expressed  nor  implied  in  his  words?  Yio you  venture — a 
worm  of  the  earth  ?  Can  you  think  yourself  warranted — for  your  own 
malignant  purpose — to  exhibit  Christ,  as  the  head  of  a  faction — your 
party  forsooth  ? — Your  language  is  neither  the  language  of  scripture,  nor 
of  common  sense."  P.  90.  It  was  the  severity  of  this  language  of  Dr. 
Campbell's,  which  provoked  the  Anti-yucobin  lievieiver  to  make  that  bold 
and  animated  retort,  which  we  meet  with  in  his  number  for  June,  1801, 
p.  112,  and  for  which  he  makes  a  suitable  apology,  wishing  rather  to 
plead  the  cause  of  truth  in  the  words  of  soberness. 

^  An  epithet  not  peculiar  to  Dr.  Campbell,  as  Mr.  Anderson,  of  Dun 
barton,  had  ,Tiiade  use  of  it  long  before.    See  his  Defence^  ^c.  p.  98. 


312    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

distinguished  nonjuror^  the  piou^  and  learned  Dr.  Hickes, 
who  had  been  dean  of  Worcester,  and  was  deprived  of 
that  dignity,  as  the  bishops  of  Scotland  were  ejected  from 
their  sees,  in  consequence  of  the  revolution.  The  character 
of  this  celebrated  divine  had  been  severely  handled  by  our 
Professor  in  his  tenth  letter,  on  the  subject  of  the  resem- 
blance between  the  Jewish  and  Christian  priesthood ;  and 
here  again,  in  the  conclusion  of  the  eleventh  lecture,  a 
heavy  charge  is  brought  forward  against  him  in  the  follow* 
ing  terms : — **'  An  author  of  whose  sentiments  I  took  some 
notice  in  my  last  lecture,  has  observed,^  that  as  the  civilians 
have  their  fictions  in  law,  our  theologists  also  have  their 
fictions  in  divinity.  It  is  but  too  true,  that  some  of  our 
theological  systems  are  so  stuffed  with  these,  that  litde  of 
plain  truth  is  to  be  learned  from  them.  And  I  think  it  will 
be  doing  no  injury  to  this  dogma  of  the  character,  to  rank 
it  among  those  fictions  in  divinity.  God  forbid  I  should 
add,  in  the  not  very  decent  words  of  that  author,  (though  I 
really  beheve  he  meant  no  harm  by  them)  xvhich  infinite 
wisdom  and  goodness  have  devised  for  our  benefit  and  adr 
vantage*  The  God  of  truth  needs  not  the  assistance  of 
falsehood,  nor  is  the  cause  of  truth  to  be  promoted  by  such 
means.  The  use  of  metaphorical  expressions,  or  figurative 
representations,  in  scripture,  give  no  propriety  to  such  an 
application  of  a  term  so  liable  to  abuse." — And  we  may  too 
justly  add,  that  there  is  hardly  a  term  in  scripture  which  is 
not  liable  to  abuse,  nay,  which  has  not  actually  been  abused 
by  the  depravity  and  perverseness  of  the  human  imagina- 
tion. The  word  fction  properly  signifies  something  feigned 
or  invented,  for  the  purpose  of  conveying  information, 
whether  true  or  false.  In  leading  to  the  discovery  of  truth, 
it  is  much  the  same  as  figure,  or  representation,  and  nothing, 
we  know,  is  more  common,  than,  in  speaking  of  that  mys- 
terious institution,  to  call  the  consecrated  bread  and  cup  in 

*  M'w^kci'  Christian  Priesthood,  lib.  i.  cap.  ii.  §  8. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScotlami.    3tS 

die  eucharist,  the  representative  symbols  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ.  Dr.  Hickes  was  treating  of  the  propriety 
©f  calling  them  so,  because  they  are  substituted  and  deputed 
for  that  body  and  blood,  which  they  thus  mystically  repre^ 
9ent.  "  This  power,"  says  he,  "  in  legislators,  of  making 
and  supposing  things  to  be  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  and 
effects  in  law,  what  in  reality  they  are  not,  is  called  by  the 
civil  law— ^c^Z(9W."  After  which,  he  produces  various  in?- 
Stances  of  such  fiction  in  the  Roman  law,  and  in  the  com- 
mon law  of  England,  and  then  adds—*''  In  like  manner, 
there  are  fictions  in  divinity,  which  infinite  wisdom  and 
goodness  have  devised  for  our  benefit  and  advantage* 
Thus  man  and  wife  are  supposed  to  be,  and  therefore  are 
ftiade  one  fleshy  as  the  law  makes  them  one  person.  Thus 
Christ  is  supposed  to  be  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foiinda-^ 
Hon  of  the  xvorld:  Thus  also  the  doctrine  of  adoption  is  ft 
divine  fiction  in  the  gospel,  as  it  was  an  human  fiction  in  the 
Roman  law,  and  in  both  cases  hath  all  the  effects  of  real 
and  legitimate  sonship.  And,  therefore,  I  hope,  it  is  no 
great  or  dangerous  paradox  to  sa}^,  that  by  divine  fiction  or 
substitution^  the  bread  is  made  the  body,  and  the  wine  the 
blood  of  Christ,"  &c.  And  nothing  surely  can  be  more 
harmless  than  these  observations,  which  need  not  to  have 
occasioned  so  much  horror  and  indignation,  as  seem  to  have 
been  raised  by  them  in  the  breast  of  our  Lecturer.  We 
may,  therefore,  justly  enough  observe,  that "  to  have  spoken 
with  proper  respect  of  men  of  such  profound  erudition,  and 
distinguished  excellence,  as  Dodwell  and  Hickes^  however 
mistaken  they  might  be,  would  certainly  not  have  dimi- 
nished in  the  least  Dr.  Campbell's  own  reputation  ii>  the 
the  world."* 

As  this  is  the  opinion  of  a  clergyman  of  the  church  of 
England,  as  by  law  established  under  the  present  govem- 
?nent,  it  cannot  be  supposed  to  proceed  from  any  prejudice 

**  S?e  Mr.  Paybeny's  el^ht  Discourses  on  the  Dottrim  ofAtomment,  p.f^^ 

49 


314    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScotland. 

or  partiality  in  favour  of  the  political  sentiments  peculiar 
to  nonjurors :  And  since  Dr.  Campbell's  account  of  those 
whom  he  calls  the  "  Scotch  Episcopal  party,"  and  still  re- 
presents as  continuing  in  their  nonjuring  principles,  seems 
to  imply  a  suspicion  that  their  original  or  transmitted  disaf- 
fection to  government  may  have  been  the  cause  of  some 
defect  or  irregularity  in  the  transmission  of  their  clerical 
orders,  we  cannot  do  better  than  sum  up  what  has  been  al- 
ready said  on  this  subject,  in  the  words  of  the  same  author 
whose  opinion  we  have  just  now  quoted,  and  who  could 
not  be  influenced  by  any  personal  or  interested  motives  to 
speak  of  the  nonjuring  clergy  either  of  England,  Ireland 
or  Scotland,  but  as  they  really  were,  and  showed  them- 
selves to  be  both  in  their  principles,  and  their  conduct. 
Having  occasion  to  mention  some  of  these  clergy,  as  zea- 
lous defenders  of  apostolic  Episcopacy,  such  as  Dodcuell 
and  Hickes^  Leslie^  and  Law^  he  argues  in  the  following 
manner  on  the  validity  of  their  ministerial  commission, 

*  In  a  note  subjoined  to  Bishop  Horne's  excellent  Sermon  on  the 
Duty  of  contending  for  the  Faith,  preached  at  the  primary  visitation  of  the 
present  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in  1786 — we  find  the  following  cha- 
racter of  Mr.  Leslie  and  his  writings—"  The  polemical  skill  of  a  Leslie 
is  an  expression  of  Bolinbroke.  A  clergyman's  library  should  not  be 
without  this  author's  theological  works,  in  two  volumes,  folio,  containing 
his  pieces  against  Deists,  Jews,  Romanists,  Socinians,  and  Quakers. 
He  is  said  to  have  brought  more  persons,  from  other  persuasions,  into  the 
church  of  England,  than  any  man  ever  did;  his  skill  in  conversation 
•being  equal  to  that  in  writing.  Allowance  must  be  made  for  a  style, 
which,  though  sufHciently  perspicuous  and  nervous,  is  not  according  to 
the  modern  ideas  of  correctness  and  elegance.  Bayle  styles  him  a  man 
of  great  merit  and  learning.  Mr.  T.  Salmon  observes,  that  his  works  must 
transmit  him  to  posterity,  as  a  man  thoroughly  learned  and  truly  pious. 
But  a  better  and  more  disinterested  judge,  Mr.  Harris,  informs  us,  that 
he  made  several  converts  from  popery,  and  says  that  notwithstanding  his 
mistaken  opinions  about  government,  and  a  few  other  matters,  he  de- 
serves the  highest  praise  for  defending  the  Christian  religion  against  De- 
ists, Jews,  and  Quakers,  and  for  admirably  well  supporting  the  doctrines 
of  the  church  of  England  against  those  of  Rome.  See  Biographical 
Dictionary."     Bishop  Home  then  adds — "  Mr.  Leslie's  writings  hav« 


Particular  Befenee  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    3 1 5 

^*  When  I  consider,  that  among  the  nonjuring  clergy, 
are  to  be  found  some  of  the  most  pious,  most  learned  and 
most  conscientious  divines  that  ever  adorned  the  church 
of  England,  I  cannot  help  thinking,  that  the  government 
would  have  gained  more  in  honour,  than  it  would  have 
lost  in  security,  had  such  men  been  permitted  to  have  re- 
mained in  possession  of  their  preferments.  But  admit- 
ting, that  policy  demanded  that  the  nonjuring  clergy 
should  be  deprived,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  they  v^^ere 
deprived  only  of  those  seculiar  possessions,  which  the 
church  had  derived  from  her  connection  with  the  state- 
Their  oifence,  if  it  may  be  called  by  so  harsh  a  name,  was 
of  a  political  nature  ;  their  punishment  corresponded  to  it. 
They  offended  against  the  ruling  powers  ;  they,  in  conse- 
quence lost  their  patronage.  But  all  the  rights,  dignities 
and  emoluments,  which  the  priesthood  derives  from  the 
piety  and  patronage  of  civil  rulers,  are  quite  distinct  from 
that  spiritual  commission,  by  which  the  clergy  administer 
the  affairs  of  Christ's  kingdom.  Of  this  commission  they 
could  not  be  deprived  by  civil  rulers,  because  it  had  been 
received  from  an  higher  authority.  The  office,  therefore, 
which  the  nonjuring  clergy  held  in  the  Christian  church, 
was  precisely  the  same,  and  every  act  of  it  as  valid,  ab- 
sti*actedly  considered,  after  their  deprivation,  as  it  was  be- 
fore ;  what  they  had  been  deprived  of,  being  only  those 
contingent  circumstances  of  emolument  and  honour,  which 
have  no  necessary  connection  with  the  ministerial  com- 
mission. The  spiritual  character  of  a  bishop,  and  his  par- 
ticular local  jurisdiction,  have  been,  at  different  times,  and 
under  different  circumstances,  separated  from  each  other : 
But  a  man  may  still  be  a  true  bishop,  whether  he  has  or  has 
not  any  particular  district,  over  which  he  is  authorized  to 

been  neglected,  because  he  had  the  misfortune  to  be  a  Jionjuror.  But 
since  the  age  is  disposed  to  drop  prejudices,  it  is  a  pity  that  this  alone 
should  be  suffered  to  remain,  especially  as  the  subject  of  it  is  now^ — 
'  waxed  old  and  ready  to  vanish  away." 


$1 6    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcdpa^if  ofScoilaneL 

preside.  Slk  h,  in  a  theological  sense,  I  conceive  the  non- 
juring  bishops  were  ;  and  1  do  not  see  how  the  testimony 
of  such  divines^  upon  the  subject  of  church  government. 
Can  be  affected  by  an  offence  committed  against  the  civil 
power;  on  the  contrary,  I  should  think  such  testimony 
ought  to  weigh  heavy  in  the  scale,  from  the  considerations, 
that  the  parties  who  furnished  it,  (whatever  judgment  may 
be  formed  of  their  political  opinions)  had  given  the  most 
unequivocal  proof  of  their  being  honest  men,  by  sacrificingf 
every  temporal  advantage  to  the  preservation  of  their  con-< 
sciences."* 

Such  is  the  opinion  given  of  the  nonjuring  clergy  in  ge* 
neral,  by  a  writer  who,  as  we  before  observed,  cannot  be 
supposed  to  feel  any  particular  bias  in  favour  of  the  cause, 
for  which  they  were  first  distinguished  by  the  title  of  nort* 
jurors^  but  seems  to  have  a  very  just  idea  of  their  principles 
and  conduct  as  ecclesiastics  ;  and  that  is  now  the  only  light 
in  which  we  have  any  occasion  to  view  their  character  or 
sentiments,  all  other  objects  of  discussion  being  at  last  taken 
out  of  the  way,  and  every  question  respecting  their  political 
attachments  entirely  laid  to  rest.  Those,  however,  who  have 
.  succeeded  them  in  their  ecclesiastical  character,  and  have 
been  the  means  of  preserving  a  regular  Episcopal  succession 
in  this  country,  are  still,  it  seems,  suspected  of  inheriting 
also  some  share  of  their  disaffection  to  the  established  go* 
Vemment ;  which  must  have  been  the  only  reason  that  could 
have  induced  Dr.  Campbell  to  keep  up  against  them  the 
odious  title  of  nonjurors^  as  a  mark  of  their  supposed  dis- 
affection. As  we  have,  therefore,  sufficiently  vindicated 
the  conduct  of  our  predecessors  in  handing  down  those 
spiritual  powers,  with  which  the  present  Scotch  Episcopal 
clergy,  according  to  the  nature  of  their  several  orders, 
have  been  duly  invested  i  it  is  but  fair  that  we  be  now  al- 


•  S^e  an  Appendtsi  to  the  Guide  to  the  Church,  in  answer  to  Sir  Richard 
Hill,  Bart.    By  the  Rev.  Charles  Daubeny,  L.L.  B.  London,  1799. 


^ariicuhr  Definee  dfthe  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    81  f 

lowed  to  speak  for  ourselves,  and  humbly  to  request,  that 
the  following  plain  and  honest  representation  of  our  case 
may  be  properly  attended  to,  by  all  who  have  a  right  to  be 
satisfied  with  respect  to  our  loyalty  as  subjects,  and  espe» 
Gially  by  those  who,  professing  to  hold  the  same  religious 
principles  as  we  do,  are  yet,  it  is  said,  kept  back  from  join* 
ing  our  communion,  by  entertaining  groundless  suspicions 
against  us,  in  regard  to  this  very  article. 

It  has  been  already  observed,  that  in  consequence  of  the 
legal  abolition  of  Episcopacy,  which  took  place  soon  after 
the  revolution  in  1688,  those  who  professed  an  adherence  tQ 
the  old  ecclesiastical  system  were  on  that  account  suspected 
of  still  maintaining  a  spirit  of  disaifection  to  the  new  go«» 
vemment.  This  is  a  fact  which  cannot  be  denied,  and 
perhaps  may  be  easily  accounted  for,  from  the  natural  ope* 
ration  of  those  heavy  penalties  by  which  their  worship  was 
prohibited,  or  at  least  the  public  celebration  of  it  severely 
restricted.  Under  these  discouraging  circumstances,  which 
continued  in  full  force  for  many  years,  it  was  hardly  pos- 
sible for  the  Scotch  Episcopalians  to  throw  off  the  reproach 
of  disloyalty  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  public  at  large, 
had  been  almost  inseparably  annexed  to  their  religious  pro* 
fession.  All  they  could  do,  was  to  conduct  themselves  in 
such  a  quiet  and  inoffensive  manner,  as  might  convince  go- 
vemment,  that  there  was  no  danger  to  be  apprehended  from 
their  principles,  and  therefore  no  necessity  for  with-holding 
from  them  any  longer  that  lenity  and  indulgence  which  they 
have  so  liberally  experienced  ever  since  our  present  most 
gracious  Sovereign  came  to  the  throne.  The  wisdom  and 
clemency  of  his  Majesty's  government,  so  happily  mani- 
fested from  the  commencement  of  his  reign,  encouraged 
them  to  hope,  that  an  offer  of  their  allegiance  would  not  be 
rejected:  and  as  soon  as  they  could  make  that  offer  in  a 
conscientious  manner,  and  consistently  with  the  principles 
by  which,  it  was  known,  their  conduct  had  been  uniformly 
mfluenced,  they  had  the  satisfaction  to  find,  from  the  King's 


31  a    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

answer  to  their  address,  that  it  was  graciously  accepted; 
in  consequence  of  which,  they  could  not  but  hope,  that  the 
British  legislature  would  take  their  case  into  consideration, 
and  see  the  expediency  of  relieving  both  clergy  and  laity 
of  the  Episcopal  communion  in  Scotland  from  the  restraints 
and  penalties  to  which  they  had  been  long  exposed  in  the 
exercise  of  their  religion.  With  this  hope,  an  application, 
was  made  to  Parliament  in  their  behalf;  and  in  the  act  that 
was  passed  for  their  relief  in  the  year  1792,  one  of  the 
clauses  of  the  preamble  ran  in  these  terms — "  Whereas 
there  is  sufficient  reason  to  believe  that  the  pastors,  minis- 
ters and  laity  of  the  Episcopal  communion  in  Scotland,  are 
now  well  attached  to  his  Majesty's  person,  family  and  go- 
vernment." And  if  at  that  time  the  King  and  Parliament 
of  Great-Britain  had  sufficient  reason  to  believe,  that  we 
were  such  dutiful  and  loyal  subjects,  the  subsequent  period 
has  affiarded  the  most  ample  proof  of  our  earnest  desire  to 
embrace  every  means  in  our  power  that  might  tend  to  con- 
firm that  belief,  and  show  us  to  be  worthy  of  the  good  cha- 
racter which  was  then  so  honourably  conferred  upon  us. 
The  period  we  allude  to  has  been  disgracefully  distin- 
guished by  every  possible  art  that  could  be  devised  for  se- 
ducing subjects  from  their  allegiance.  None  has  ever  sur- 
passed it  in  plots  and  associations,  not  for  promoting  the 
interests  of  this  or  the  other  candidate  for  the  crown,  and 
setting  up  one  in  preference  to  another,  but  for  the  express 
purpose  of  cutting  off  at  once  the  pretensions  of  every 
claimant,  extirpating  the  whole  race  of  kings,  subverting  the 
foundation  of  all  government,  and  bursting  asunder  not 
only  the  bonds  of  civilized  society,  but  every  religious  tie 
that  connects  man  with  his  God,  and  tends  to  secure  his 
peace  and  happiness  both  here  and  hereafter. 

During  all  these  wild  and  lawless  attempts,  which  could 
have  nothing  for  their  object  but  the  dissemination  of  anar- 
chy and  confusion,  and  every  evil  work,  no  such  base  ima- 
gination could  be  laid  to  the  charge  of  our  society.   Attach- 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  cf  Scotland.    319 

ment  to  kingly  power  has  been  always  the  characteristic  of 
the  church  to  which  we  belong,  and  no  one  has  ever  beea 
found  connected  with  any  seditious  club,  or  democratic 
party,  who  dared  to  call  himself  a  regular  Scotch  Episcopa- 
lian. Through  the  whole  of  that  awful  and  arduous  con- 
test, in  which  our  country  was  lately*  engaged,  whatever 
aid  government  could  derive  from  the  pubhc  solemnities  of 
religion,  was  regularly  afforded  in  our  sacred  assemblies : 
And  on  the  days  appointed  by  royal  authority,  either  for 
national  humiliation,  or  general  thanksgiving,  our  people 
were  always  seen  devoutly  assembled  in  their  several  places 
of  worship,  using  the  various  forms  of  prayer  and  praise^ 
which  were  composed  for  these  solemnities,  and  may  still 
be  referred  to  as  proofs  of  that  appropriate  mode  of  devO' 
tion  with  which  they  were  celebrated.  On  all  these  occa- 
sions, the  clergy  of  our  communion  did  not  fail  to  manifest 
an  exemplary  zeal  in  impressing  on  the  minds  of  those  un- 
der their  charge,  a  just  sense  of  their  duty  as  good  Chris- 
tians and  as  loyal  subjects,  exhorting  them  eamesdy,  in  the 
words  of  inspired  wisdom,  to  "  fear  the  Lord  and  the 
king,  and  not  to  meddle  with  them  that  are  given  to  change." 
To  the  king,  as  our  rightful  sovereign,  and  to  his  royal 
family,  as  pledges  of  a  happy  succession  to  his  crown  and 
dignity,  we  feel  ourselves  attached  by  all  the  ties  of  con- 
science, as  well  as  gratitude,  and  have,  therefore,  uniformly 
promoted,  to  the  utmost  of  our  power,  those  salutary  mea- 
sures of  his  government,  which  have,  from  time  to  time, 
been  adopted  for  preserving  the  internal  peace  of  the  king- 
dom, as  well  as  its  security  from  every  hostile  invasion. 

For  the  truth  of  all  this,  we  may  appeal,  and  have  ap- 
pealed to  the  testimony  of  those  who  frequent  our  places 
of  public  worship  j  many  of  whom  being  placed  in  offices  of 
trust  under  government,  would  give  no  countenance  to  our 
religious  assemblies,  if  they  did  not  find  them  such  as  are 

*  This  W9fs  written  during  the  short  continuance  of  the  Izkq  peace . 


320    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScotkt^ 

not  only  consistent  with  the  laws,  but  worthy  of  protection; 
aad  were  not  perfectly  sensible,  that  his  Majesty  has  no 
better  subjects,  nor  persons  more  attached  to  his  govern* 
ment,  on  principles  of  permanent  loyalty,  than  the  bishops 
and  clergy  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church.  May  we  not 
then  be  allowed  to  ask  on  what  gi^ound  it  is,  that  we  are  still 
to  be  branded  with  the  title  of  nonjurors^  as  a  mark  of  our 
supposed  disaffection  in  refusing  to  swear  allegiance  to  the 
sovereign  upon  the  throne  ;  a  supposition  as  unfounded,  as 
it  is  meant  to  be  unfavourable,  and  which  can  only  proceed 
from  a  desire  to  keep  up  odious  and  unnecessary  distinc* 
tions  among  his  Majesty's  subjects  I  Oaths  may  no  doubt 
be  contrived,  and,  in  some  instances  have  been  required, 
both  of  a  civil  and  religious  nature,  which  we  should  think 
ourselves  obliged  to  decline,  as  neither  consistent  with  our 
principles,  nor  suited  to  our  situation.  But  it  is  impossible 
that  we  could  with  any  propriety,  even  on  our  present  foot- 
ing of  enjoying  toleration  only,  refuse  to  swear  allegiance 
to  a  sovereign,  for  whom  we  solemnly  and  sincerely  pray, 
as  often  as  we  assemble  in  the  house  of  prayer,  that  "  God 
would  be  his  defender  and  keeper,  and  give  him  the  victory 
over  all  his  enemies."  With  these,  and  such  like  petitions, 
put  into  our  mouths  by  that  excellent  liturgy,  which  we  ad- 
mire, and  venerate,  and  daily  use  in  our  public  service,  it 
is  wonderful  that  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church  should  yet 
be  suspected  of  any  thing  that  looks  like  disaffection,  or  any 
jealousy  be  entertained  of  such  an  ecclesiastical  body,  eveii 
though  dissenting  from  the  establishment  of  Scotland,  when 
by  that  very  dissent,  it  is  more  closely  united  to  the  esta* 
blished  church  of  England.  Yet  this  bond  of  union,  arising 
from  a  similarity  of  constitution,  as  far  as  regards  the  spi- 
ritual authority  of  the  church,  has  been  held  Up  to  derisiotty 
as  a  mere  imaginary  privilege,  and  the  "  Scotch  Episcopal 
party^''  as  Dr.  Campbell  has  called  it,  is  exposed  to  ridi- 
cule, for  adhering  to  that  form  of  ecclesiastical  polity,  which 
has  the  sanction  of  legal  and  constitutional  swppQrt  in  the  fcu' 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    321. 

greater,  and  most  distinguished  part  of  the  British  Empiref, 
We  need  not  then  be  ashamed  of  its  being  said,  however 
we  may  object  to  the  terms  in  which  it  is  mentioned,  that 
this  adherence  to  the  polity  of  the  primitive  church  *'  is 
made  a  principal  foundation  of  dissent  by  a  pretty  numer- 
ous sect  in  this  country."  For  though  we  have  no  right  to 
value  ourselves  on  our  numbers,  in  proportion  to  the  popu- 
lation of  Scotland,  and  it  is  no  part  of  our  belief,  that  the 
truth  must  necessarily  be  on  the  side  of  the  majority,  yet 
we  see  no  reason  why  the  terms,  sect  and  partij^  should  be 
applied,  as  marks  of  reproach,  to  those  whose  religious  de- 
nomination as  Epiocopaly  is  countenanced  by  that  of  the  so- 
vereign on  the  throne,  of  the  "  Lords  spiritual  in  parlia- 
ment assembled,"  and  of  much  the  largest  proportion  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  united  kingdom,  when  compared  to 
those  of  any  other  religious  persuasion. 

These  considerations  might  be  thought  sufficient  to  se- 
cure the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland  from  the  disgraceful  im- 
putation of  being  allied  to  that  sectarian  spirit  which  de- 
lights in  opposition  to  whatever  is  established,  and  is  never 
satisfied,  till  every  institution  of  superior  dignity  and  merit 
be  brought  down  to  its  own  mean,  debasing  standard* 
This  is  not  the  doctrine  by  which  we  wish  to  be  distin- 
guished ;  nor  ought  we  to  be  ranked  among  those  modem 
authors  of  division,  the  founders  of  new  sects,  of  whom 
Dr.  Campbell  observes—^''  it  is  hard  to  conceive  to  what 
the  disciples  of  some  recent  sectarians  can  be  made  prose- 
lytes, unless  to  uncharitableness,  hatred  and  calumny  against 
their  fellow  Christians,  and  that  on  the  most  frivolous  or 
unintelligible  pretexts."  As  we  do  not  deal  in  "  hatred  or 
calumny"  against  any  human  beings,  so  neither  are  the  rea- 
sons "  frivolous  or  unintelligible,"  for  which  we  have  con- 
tinued in  a  state  of  separation  from  the  religious  establish- 
ment of  this  part  of  our  island :  a  separation  founded  on 
the  most  substantial  and  important  grounds  ;  such  as  have 
been  lon^  topics  of  serious  discussion,  and  may  be  easily 

41 


322    Particutar  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScotland< 

understood  by  all  who  are  desirous  to  inquire  into  them^ 
We  do  not,  therefore,  consider  ourselves  as  having  any  re-* 
lation,  or  even  resemblance  to  those  "  modern  authors  of 
division,  who  are  daily  introducing  new  sects  in  countries, 
where  Christianity  is  universally  professed,  and  where 
there  is  free  access  by  the  scriptures,  both  to  its  doctrine 
and  to  its  precepts."  Yet  Dr.  Campbell,  who  gives  this 
account  of  them  and  their  proceedings,  might  have  known, 
that  these  "  recent  sectaries,"  as  he  calls  them,  and  who 
are  still  abounding  more  and  more  in  number  and  influence, 
are  not  slow  to  vindicate  themselves  on  such  pretences  as 
these—."  that  the  scripture,  though  in  all  hands,  is  either 
abused  or  neglected  j  that  Christianity,  though  universally 
professed  among  us,  is  no  more  than  a  bare  profession; 
that  its  doctrines  are  not  properly  understood,  nor  its 
precepts  rightly  applied  ;  and,  therefore,  they  come  with 
a  charitable  zeal,  to  rectify  every  abuse,  to  preach  the  true 
gospel  in  this  unenlightened  land,  and  open  the  eyes  of  a 
Wind,  deluded  people." 

This  has  been  the  sectarian  cry  in  all  ages  ;  and  how  far 
it  may  be  either  checked  or  encouraged  by  some  of  the  ar- 
guments made  use  of  in  these  Lectures^  we  shall  not  pre- 
tend to  determine.  That  they  have  no  particular  tendency 
to  repress  the  sectarian  spirit,  may  indeed  be  justly  inferred 
from  the  character  given  of  them  by  one  sufficiently  ac- 
quainted with  their  whole  end  and  object,  and  who  tells  us, 
plainly,  that  the  study  recommended  by  them,  "  can  give 
no  oifence  to  any,  but  to  those  who  maintain  the  jw^  divinum 
(divine  right)  of  bishops,  and  their  hereditary  succession 
from  the  apostles."^ — Indeed,  the  Lecturer  himself  makes 
a  kind  of  apology  even  for  those  "  contentious  teachers," 
to  whom  he  had  been  alluding,  and  "  of  whom  he  would 
not  presume  to  say,  that  they  may  not  occasionally  do  good, 

*  See  the  view  of  Dr.  Campbell's  Prelect  ions  hi  Theology,  prefixed  to 
his  Lecturer. 


J^artlcuhr  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScothrtS.    325 

though  there  be  but  too  great  reason  to  dread  that  the  evil 
preponderates.  And  even  here,"  says  he,  "  I  am  to  be  un- 
derstood as  speaking  of  the  first  authors  of  such  unchristian 
separations.  I  know  too  well  the  power  of  education  and 
of  early  prejudice,  to  impute  equal  malignity  to  those  who 
may  succeed  them,  whether  teachers  or  disciples."^ 

All  this,  to  be  sure,  is  perfectly  agreeable  to  Dr.  Camp- 
bell's well  known  sentiments  on  the  subject  of  heresy  and 
schism,  the  last  of  which  particularly  he  seemed  to  consider 
as  a  breach  of  charity^  and  not  a  breach  of  communioru  For 
so  he  had  expressly  said  in  a  work  published  by  himself — 
*-'  How  much  soever  of  a  schismatical  or  heretical  spirit,  in 
the  apostolic  sense  of  these  terms,  may  have  contributed  to 
the  formation  of  the  different  sects  into  which  the  Christian 
world  is  at  present  divided  ;  no  person  who,  in  the  spirit  of 
candour  and  charity,  adheres  to  that  which,  to  the  best  of 
his  judgment  is  right,  though  in  this  opinion  he  should  be 
lilistakea,  is  in  the  scriptural  sense  either  schismatic  or  he- 
retic.    And  he,  on  the  contrary,  whatever  sect  he  belongs 
to,  is  more  entitled  to  these  odious  appellations,   who  is 
most  apt  to  throw  the  imputation  upon  others."'}'    This 
description  we  find  particularly  applied  in  the  work  before 
us,  to  that  poor  persecuted  nonjuror  Mr.  Dodwell,  against 
whom,  after  a  great  deal  more  of  such  bitter  declamation,  our 
Lecturer  thus  goes  on — "  His  unceasing  cry  was  schism  ;f 
yet  in  the  scriptural  sense  a  greater  schismatic  than  himself 
the  age  did  not  produce.     Whose  doctrine  was  ever  found 
more  hostile  to  that  fundamental  principle  declared  by  our 
Lord  to  be  the  criterion  of  our  Christianity,  mutual  love  ? 
Whose  doctrine  was  ever  more  successful  in  planting,  by 

*  Lecture  iv. 

t  See  his  Dissertation  on  Heresy,  prefixed  to  the  Translation  of  the 
Gospels,  p.  453,  434.  4to.  edit. 

:j:  This  is  evidendy  borrowed  from  the  coarser  language  of  Mr.  Ander^ 
son  of  Dunbartun,  who  had  sad  of  Dodwell,  "  Schism^  scbistn  was  iiis 
vverlasting  clack."     ^tt\i\s  Defence,  ksfc.  p,  31. 


324    Particular  Defence  of  the  episcopacy  Of  Scotland* 

means  of  uncharitable  iand  self-opinioned  judgments,  the 
principle  of  hatred  in  its  stead  ?  The  test,  to  which  scripture 
points  is — -Does  the  teaching  in  question  alienate  the  hearts 
of  Christians,  or  unite  them  ?  Does  it  conciliate  the  affec- 
tions, where  differences  have  unhappily  arisen  ?  or,  does  it 
widen  the  breach  ?  If  the  former,  the  spirit  is  Christian ; 
if  the  latter,  schismatical.  The  former  is  not  more  produc- 
tive of  charity^  the  end  of  the  commandment,  or  gospel  co* 
venant,  and  the  bond  of  perfectncss,  than  the  latter  is  of  its 
opposite,  malignity,  the  source  of  discord,  the  parent  of  in- 
tolerance and  persecution."^ 

We  acknowledge  that  all  this  sounds  well,  and  shows  the 
%vriter  to  have  possessed  a  sufficient  command  of  words  for 
any  purpose  he  might  have  in  view.  But  does  it  afford  any 
clear,  distinct  idea  of  the  point  in  question,  or  serve  to  il- 
lustrate the  scripture  sense  of  schism,  of  which  discord, 
hatred  and  malignity  may  be  the  effects^  but  certainly  are 
not  the  essence  ?  It  is  true,  an  apostle  speaks  of  schisms 
among  the  Corinthians,  even  when  they  seemed  to  be  of  the 
same  communion,  and  were  assembled  for  the  same  pur- 
pose. "  When  ye  come  together  in  the  church,"  says  he,  "  I 
hear  that  there  be  schisms  or  divisions  among  you  i"'!'  And 

*  Lecture  v  i. 

■j-  1  Cor.  xi.  18.  From  this  text  it  has  often  been  inferred,  that  schism 
ian  only  mean  a  breach  of  charity,  not  of  cominuntGn ;  and  with  that 
view  it  was  frequently  referred  to  by  the  English  dissenters,  at  the  time 
when  the  question  about  occasional  conformity  was  agitated,  and  many 
pamphlets  were  published  to  show,  that  even  the  apostles  formed  differ- 
ent communions  apart  from  each  other,  though  they  were  not  scrupulous 
about  mutually  communicating  now  and  then,  as  occasion  required.  It 
may,  therefore,  abate,  in  some  measure,  the  confidence  of  Dr.  Campbell's 
admirers,  to  find  that  he  has  only  borrowed  from  others  his  strange  un- 
scriptural  notion  of  schism,  the  fallacy  of  which  was  sufficiently  exposed 
by  the  learned  Mr.  Wail,  author  of  ihe  masterly  work  on  Infant- Baptism y 
■who,  in  another  publication  called—"  A  Vindication  of  the  Apostles  from 
a,  very  falsa  iinputation  laid  en  thein,  in  several  English  pamphlets,  viz. 
that  they  refused  co?istant,  and  held  only  occasional  cotntnunion  vcitb  one 
mother^  andv:ith  one  another's  churches;''  adverting  to  the  above  men- 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    325 

it  is  likewise  evident  from  the  context,  that  by  the  sdusms 
of  which  the  Corinthians  were  guilty,  the  apostle  meant 
their  breaking  off  into  separate  parties,  that  the  rich,  despis* 
ing  the  poor,  might  partake  of  the  Lord's  supper  by  them- 
selves ;  which  was  such  an  uncharitable  and  unbecoming 
division,  as,  if  not  timeously  checked,  would  soon  have  led 
to  that,  which  even  Dr.  Campbell  acknowledges,  "  was  con- 
sidered as  the  great  criterion  of  schism,  the  setting  up  ano- 
ther altar,  beside  the  one  altar  of  the  bishop."  But  when  he 
flies  off  from  this  fair  and  just  standard,  by  which  every 
thing  relating  to  schism  ought  to  be  measured,  and  endea* 
vours  to  entangle  the  subject  with  a  number  of  questions, 
plausible  indeed,  but  far  from  being  pertinent,  all  we  have 
to  do,  is  to  balance  these  v/ith  a  few  other  questions,  much 
more  apposite  and  equally  important,  by  asking  in  return — • 
Is  there  no  other  criterion  of  Christianity,  but  mutual  love  I 
Is  there  not  th  faith  to  be  contended  for,  as  well  as  a  charity 
to  be  inculcated  ?  And  is  not  a  perversion  of  the  former  as 
much  to  be  guarded  agamst,  as  a  wounding  of  the  latter  l 
Was  the  beloved  disciple  of  a  schismatical  or  sectarian  spi- 
rit, when  he  gave  this  warning  to  those  whom  he  loved  in 
the  truth — ^'^  If  there  come  any  unto  you,  and  bring  not  this 
doctrine,  receive  him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid  him 
God  speed  ?""^"  Would  Dr.  Campbell  himself  have  been 
guilty  of  "  w^oLinding  charity,"  if  his  preaching  disagree- 

tioned  notion  of  schism,  as  supported  by  the  text  we  have  quoted,  argues 
jn  the  following  manner. — "  This  is  just  as  if  any  one  should  prove,  that 
actual  killing  of  a  man  is  not  in  the  scripture  notion  murder,  by  this 
argument,  that  the  scripture  does  sometimes  call  hatred — murder.  He 
that  hateth  his  brother  is  a  murderer.  (St.  John  iii.  15.]  Or  that  actual 
defiling  a  woman  is  not,  in  our  Soviour's  sense,  adultery,  because  he 
sometimes  calls  lusting  after  her  by  that  name.  If  St.  Paul  do  call  those 
animosities,  and  the  taking  of  sides,  which  had  not  yet  broken  out  into 
actual  separation,  and  renouncing  of  communion,  but  was  in  a  fair  way 
to  it,  by  the  name  of  schism,  how  much  more  would  he  have  called  it 
so,  if  they  had  proceeded  to  an  absolute  division,  two  altars  set  up  in 
opposition  to  one  another?" 
*  2  St.  John  V.  10. 


326    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  ofScotland» 

able,  though  necessary  truths,  should  at  any  time  have  of- 
fended his  hearers,  and  made  them  prefer  more  accommo- 
dating teachers  ?  Yet  wounding  of  charity^  like  what  he  lays 
to  the  charge  of  Dodwell,  we  may  justly  say,  is  his  "  un- 
ceasing cry ;"  and  when  he  meets  with  sentiments  conge- 
nial to  his  own  on  this  subject,  he  does  not  fail  to  recom- 
mend them  in  the  strongest  terms,  as  "  conveying  an  idea 
of  the  church  truly  rational,  enlarged  and  sublime  !"^ 

This,  no  doubt,  may  be  all  very  fine,  as  intended  to  dis- 
play, what  our  learned  Theologist  calls — the  "  liberal  spirit 
of  the  gospel :"  But  we  must  confess,  whatever  shall  be 
thought  of  our  "  ideas"  of  the  matter,  that  "  we  have  not 
so  learned  Christ,"  nor  been  taught  to  consider  any  thing 
connected  with  what  is  now  termed  "  liberality  of  spirit," 
as  at  all  favourable  to  the  pure  and  genuine  truths  of  the 
gospel.  These  truths,  we  are  told,  are  to  be  spoken  in  love ; 
but  still  they  must  be  spoken  and  maintained,  as  God  has 
delivered  them  to  us  ;  and  no  separation  should  ever  be  at-* 
tempted  between  the  love  which  Christianity  requires,  and 
the  truth  which  it  reveals.  That  love  which  has  not  this 
truth  for  its  foundation,  is  but  a  false  appearance  of  charity, 
as  every  thing  must  be,  which  encourages  men  in  those  er- 
rors that  are  destructive  to  their  souls.  Yet  nothing  is  more 
evident,  than  that  men  are  too  much  disposed  to  seek  this 
encouragement  to  themselves,  and  too  v/illing  to  believe, 
that  while  they  are  sincere  in  their  profession,  v^^hatever 
that  profession  may  be,  no  danger  is  to  be  apprehended  ei- 
ther from  ignorance  or  error.  St.  Paul,  it  may  be  presumed, 
xvas  as  sincere  in  his  profession  as  any  man  could  be,  when 
*'  he  lived  in  all  good  conscience  after  the  manner  of  the 
law  of  his  fathers,  and  was  zealous  towards  God,  verily  be- 
lieving, that  he  ought  to  do  many  things  contrary  to  the 
name  of  Jesus  :"  And  yet,  after  he  became  a  Christian,  he 
acknowledged,  that  in  all  this  he  had  been  no  better  than 

*  Lecture  iv. 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.  327 

*^  a  blasphemer,  a  persecutor,  and  injurious."  It  was  a  con- 
fident dependence  on  his  own  sincerity,  as  well  as  a  high 
opinion  of  his  superior  knowledge,  that  made  him  so  stre- 
nuously resist,  before  his  conversion,  all  the  evidence  that 
could  be  offered  for  the  truth  of  the  gospel.  And  to  the 
same,  or  similar  causes,  it  may  still  be  owing,  that  so  many 
who  profess  to  receive  this  faith  as  delivered  to  the  church 
by  duly  commissioned  teachers,  are  yet  unwilling  to  be- 
lieve, that  any  such  commission  is  necessary  either  for  pre- 
serving the  faith,  or  supporting  the  unity  of  the  church,  or 
that  there  is  any  thing  wrong  in  heresy  and  schism,  if  they 
be  only  embraced,  and  adhered  to,  "  in  the  spirit  of  can- 
dour and  charity." 

Indeed,  if  by  the  word  Church  we  are  to  understand 
every  sect  or  party  which  professes  to  be  Christian,  what- 
ever be  the  form  of  its  ministry,  or  the  authority  of  those 
employed  in  its  service,  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as 
schism^  considered  as  a  separation  from  the  church  of  Christ# 
Hatred,  or  malignity,  or  something  else  may  be  found  out, 
whereon  to  fix  the  imputation  of  schism,  as  something  sin- 
ful in  the  sight  of  God  ;  but  this  is  evidently  to  clothe  one 
sin  in  the  dress  of  another,  that  by  giving  the  same  appel- 
lation to  both,  we  may  seem  to  lessen  the  number  of  trans- 
gressions, though  without  diminishing  the  proportion  of 
their  guilt.  This  is  a  species  of  self-deceit,  which  every 
wise  man  would  wish  to  avoid  j  and,  therefore,  in  order  to 
deal  honestly  with  ourselves,  we  must  take  care  to  view  the 
things  of  religion,  not  according  to  the  passions  or  preju- 
dices of  men,  but  in  that  light  only  wherein  the  scriptures  of 
truth  represent  them  ;  which  is  particularly  necessary  with 
regard  to  the  nature  of  the  church,  and  the  nature  of  schism, 
as  the  latter  cannot  be  rightly  understood,  without  a  proper 
knowledge  of  the  former. 

For  discovering  the  nature  of  any  society,  we  generally 
have  recourse  to  the  names  or  titles  by  which  it  is  distin- 
guished, and  particularly  to  the  descriptions  given  of  it,  by 


328    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

those  who  had  been  employed  in  forming  or  executing  the 
plan  of  its  constitution,  and  drawing  up  the  rules  that  were 
to  be  adopted  for  the  management  of  its  concerns.  It  is 
by  the  same  means  that  we  have  come  to  the  knowledge 
of  the  true  nature  and  constitution  of  that  spiritual  society 
called  the  church  of  Christ,  and  which,  among  other  ap- 
pellations and  allusions,  expressive  of  its  original  purpose, 
is  frequently  compared  to  a  body ; — and  "  as  we  have 
many  members  in  one  body,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  and  all 
members  have  not  the  same  office,  so  we  being  many,  are 
one  body  in  Christ,  and  every  one  members  one  of  ano- 
ther."^ And  to  show  us  more  particularly  what  this  body 
is,  we  are  told  by  the  same  apostle,  that "  God  hath  put  all 
things  under  the  feet  of  Christ,  and  gave  him  to  be  the 
head  over  all  things  to  the  churchy  which  is  his  body,  the 
fulness  of  him  that  fiUeth  all  in  all."t  It  vv^as  for  the  edify- 
ing of  this  body,  that  the  work  of  the  ministry  was  ap* 
pointed,  that  so  Christians  "  may  grow  up  into  him  in  all 
things,  who  is  the  Head,  even  Christ ;  from  whom  the 
whole  body,  fitly  joined  together,  and  compacted  by  that 
which  every  joint  supplieth,  according  to  the  effectual 
AA^orking  in  the  measure  of  every  part,  maketh  increase  of 
the  body,  unto  the  edifying  of  itself  in  love."J 

It  is  this  heavenly  principle  of  love,  which  maintains 
unity  in  the  church  on  earth,  and  prevents  that  unhappy 
separation,  which  would  otherwise  put  an  effectual  stop  to 
the  increase  of  the  body.  For  this  reason,  "  the  members 
must  have  the  same  care,  one  for  another,  that  there  may 
be  no  schism  in  the  body  ;"||  and  when  the  body  is  thus  pre- 
served from  division,  it  is  very  properly  said  to  be  edified, 
to  be  kept  together  by  the  cement  of  faith  and  love,  so  as 
to  resemble  a  compact  and  commodious  building,  fitly 
framed  for  answering  eveiy  purpose  intended  by  it.     Thi"^; 


*  Rom.xii.  4,  5.  f  Eph.  i.  22,  21. 

t  Epiies.  iv.  15,  35.  !l  I  Cor.  xii.  2,?. 


Partkukt'  Defence  dfthe  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    339 

is  that  "  bond  of  perfectness,"  as  St.  Paul  calls  it,  which 
Would  secure  the  firmness  of  that  spiritual  building  raised 
^*  on  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,   Jesus 
Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone."     And  with- 
out this  sound,  cementing  principle  of  unity,  the  firmest 
foundations,  the  stateliest  walls,   the  best  disposed  apart- 
ments, would  soon  become  no  better  than  naked  and  de- 
formed ruins,  open  to  every  storm,  and  exposed  to  all  the 
desolation  of  wasting  elements.     It  is  under  these,  and 
such  like  bold  and  striking  metaphors,  that  the  apostles  of 
Christ,  and  St.  Paul  in  particular,  describe  the  design  and 
construction  of  that  solid  and  durable  edifice,  reared  by 
them  after  the  model  left  them  by  their  blessed  Master,  and 
so  different  from  the  air)^,  fantastic  structures  which  latter 
ages  have  exhibited,  according  to  the  humours  of  the  times, 
and  the  ever- varying  fancies  of  popular  phrensy.     But 
from  the  view  which  we  have  already  taken  of  the  first  es* 
tablishment  of  the  Christian  church,   it  must  have  suffi- 
ciently appeared,   in  what  a  happy  manner  the  spirit  of 
unity  knit  all  the  members  together,  and  how  careful  every 
one  was  to  know  himself,  his  station,  and  his  duty,  and  to 
think  and  act  soberly,  according  to  the  situation  which  pro* 
vidence  had  allotted  to  him. — As  the  great  Head  of  the 
church  had  appointed  divers  orders  and  officers  in  it,  they 
could  not  but  see  the  necessity  of  preserving  the  subordi- 
nation which  he  had  established ;  and  they  all  conspired, 
"  as  workers  together"  for  the  same  blessed  purpose,  to  be 
faithful  in  their  several  departments,  each  contributing  hi^ 
best  endeavours  "  to  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  to  the 
work  of  the  ministiy,    to  the  edifying  of  the  body  of 
Christ." 

Such,  then,  being  the  nature  and  design  of  the  Christian 
church,  considered  as  a  visible  society,  formed  by  Christ 
himself,  for  the  gracious  purpose  of  uniting  men  to  him, 
in  faith,  love  and  obedience  here,  and  by  that  means,  in 
everlasting  gloiy  hereafter,  we  may  well  suppose,  that  such 

49 


USO    PaHkUlar  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

a  holy  and  heavenly  society,  so  evidently  designed  for  the 
happiness  of  mankind,  would  not  fail  to  awaken  the  spite 
and  envy  of  that  spiritual  enemy,  who  having,  from  the 
beginning  of  the  world,  acted  in  opposition  to  the  Saviour^ 
has  been  emphatically  called  the  Destroyer^  as  perpetually 
bent  on  the  destruction  and  misery  of  the  human  race* 
No  sooner  was  the  church  founded  on  earth,  than  the 
malice  of  hell  was  directed  against  it ;  and  as  the  power  of 
its  adversary  could  not  prevail,  for  its  total  overthrow,  his 
great  object  was,  to  render  it  as  ineffectual  as  possible  to 
the  merciful  purpose  for  which  it  was  intended,  by  under- 
mining it  secretly  in  the  way  of  discord  and  division,  when 
he  could  not  beat  it  down  directly  by  an  open  and  bold 
attack. 

Hence,  then,  we  may  discover  the  nature  and  origin  of 
that  sin  against  the  church,  and,  consequently,  against  its 
divine  Founder,  which  Christians  have  been  long  and 
earnestly  warned  to  avoid,  as  most  dangerous  and  deadly^ 
under  the  name  of  schism^  a  word  which,  from  the  scrip- 
tural application  of  its  original  meaning,  must  signify  a 
cutting  off,  or  separating  from  that  ecclesiastical  body,  of 
which  Christ  is  the  Head,  and,  therefore,  a  deprivation  of 
that  nourishment  and  strength  which  he  affords  to  all  his 
faithful  members.  This  was  undoubtedly  the  primitive, 
nay,  the  apostolical  sense  of  the  word  schism,  whatever  at- 
tempts may  have  been  made  to  pervert  its  natural  meanings 
and  give  a  softer  turn  to  the  application  of  it.  Custom, 
which  reconciles  us  almost  to  every  thing,  has  brought  us  at 
last  to  look  upon  the  divisions  which  now  take  place  among 
those  who  profess  to  be  Christians,  in  a  very  different  light 
from  that  in  which  they  would  have  been  viewed  in  the 
primitive  days  of  the  church :  And  something  which  we 
have  substituted  for  true  Christian  charity,  requires  us,  it 
seems,  to  believe,  that  the  church  of  Christ  is  to  be  found, 
and,  therefore,  salvation  to  be  obtained,  in  any  society,  or 
with  any  denomination  of  persons  professing  to  be  Chris- 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    331 

tians.  Hence  it  must  necessarily  be  inferred,  that  as  some" 
thing  called  a  church  may  be  found  every  where^  that  which 
we  caU  schism  can  be  found  no  where.  This  matter,  how- 
ever, is  vQYy  differently  represented  in  the  inspired  writ- 
ings of  the  New  Testament ;  and  if  the  constitution  of  the 
Christian  church  be  the  same  now  that  it  was  in  the  days 
of  the  apostles,  the  sin  of  schism  must  be  the  *same  like- 
wise ;  consisting  still,  as  it  did  then,  in  a  cutting  off,  or 
being  cut  off,  from  the  body  of  Christ,  a  separation  from 
the  communion,  an  encroachment  on  the  government,  and 
a  breach  in  the  unity  of  his  church.  But  the  nature  and 
consequences  of  schism  have  been  so  well  described  by  a 
late  eminent  divine  of  the  church  of  England,  and  in  such 
a  concise  and  energetic  manner,  that  we  hope  to  be  excused 
for  giving  the  following  extract  from  one  of  his  popular 
and  most  useful  tracts,  as  fully  expressive  of  our  own  sen- 
timents on  this  subject.  Having  pointed  out  some  prevail- 
ing errors  with  respect  to  government,  and  the  setting  up 
the  power  of  the  people  as  supreme,  whereas  the  scripture 
assures  us,  that  "  there  is  no  power  but  of  God  ;"  he  then 
proceeds  to  give  an  account  of  that,  which  has  the  same 
effect  in  the  church,  that  rebellion  or  sedition  has  in  the 
state,  and  his  words  are  these : 

"  The  same  principle  which  disturbs  the  order  of  civil 
government,  breaks  the  peace  of  the  church.  When  it 
operates  against  the  state,  it  is  called  the  pozver  of  the  peo- 
ple ;  but  in  religion  it  is  called  private  judg-ment,  and  some- 
times conscience ;  but  it  always  acts  against  the  judgment 
of  authority.  It  has  been  a  great  misfortune  of  late  times, 
that  we  have  been  partakers  in  other  men's  sins,  by  making 
too  light  of  the  offence  and  danger  of  schism.  What  self- 
interest  denominates  liberality  and  charity,  is  really  nothing 
but  indifference  or  ignorance.  The  church  being  the  church 
of  God,  it  cannot  be  in  the  power  of  man  to  put  ministers 
into  it,  and  give  them  authority  to  act.  The  rule  of  the 
scriptures  is  therefore  absolute,  that  no  man  taketh  this 


■^52    Partkutar  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

honour  unto  himself  but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  which 
calling  must  be  visible,  because  that  of  Aaron  was  so,  who 
is  the  pattern  in  the  scriptures. — Ministers  in  the  Christian 
church  act,  for  God,  to  the  people  ;  which  they  cannot  do 
without  God's  commission. — The  rule,  and  its  reason,  are 
both  plain  to  common  sense,  and  want  no  explanation.  It 
is  to  be  considered  farther,  that  if  the  promises  of  God  are 
jnade  to  his  church,  no  man  can  expect  to  obtain  them,  by 
joining  himself  to  any  other  company  of  men,  after  his  own 
fancy.  The  ark  of  Noah  was  a  pattern  and  pledge  of  the 
church  of  Christ ;  and  the  persons  saved  in  it,  were  saved 
by  water,  as  we  are  by  baptism  j  so  the  church  of  England 
understands  it.  Now,  let  us  only  ask  ourselves,  what  be-^ 
came  of  those  who  were  out  of  the  ark  ?  The  parallel  will 
suggest  what  great  danger  there  must  be  to  those  who  were 
©ut  of  the  church.  Thus  did  primitive  Christians  argue^ 
and  unless  they  had  privileges  which  we  have  lost,  we  must 
argue  in  the  same  manner  now.  If  not,  we  do  dishonour 
to  the  grace  of  God,  who  hath  mercifully  taken  us  into  the 
ark  of  his  church,  and  our  indifference  will  do  no  good  $ 
nobody  will  be  gained  by  it ;  offences  among  men  will  be 
multiplied,  and  the  authority  of  God's  religion  will  be 
%veakened  ;  for  if  the  church  may  be  any  thing,  men  will 
soon  conclude  it  may  be  nothing ;  and  who  will  not  own, 
if  his  eyes  are  open,  that  much  of  the  relaxation  and  con- 
fusion of  latter  times  hath  arisen  from  the  poor,  low  ideas 
which  some  good  men  have  entertained  and  propagated 
upon  this  great  subject  ?  Others  who  have  dared  to  argue 
of  late  years  as  Christians  did  of  old,  have  been  branded 
%vith  the  name  of  ht^h  church?nen,  and  very  deservedly ; 
for  we  know  of  no  other  true  churchmen;  but  faction, 
seeking  rest  for  itself,  can  find  none,  but  by  Inventing 
names  and  distinctions  which  have  no  sense  in  the  mouth 
of  a  Christian  ;  they  are  all  of  this  world,  and  calculated  to 
serve  some  carnal  purpose.  Wise  people  should  consider, 
that  whatever  examples  there  may  have  been  of  piety, 


fiartlcukf  Defenee  t>fthe  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    333 

learning,  wit  or  wisdom,  joined  with  schism,  they  can 
never  prove  that  schism  is  no  sin  ;  no  man  can  be  taken  aa 
authority  against  the  laws  of  God ;  and  the  great  law  of 
charity  is  supreme  over  all*  It  is  not  kindness,  but  mean-? 
ness,  which  shows  respect  to  sin  in  any  man  ;  for  no  man's 
person  can  render  sin  respectable*  What  is  convenient  to 
him,  if  pernicious  in  itself,  and  its  consequences,  ought  td 
be  detestable  to  us  ;  and  if  offence  must  be  given,  it  is 
better  to  offend  man  than  God.  Tenderness  to  schism  may 
be  a  fine  thing,  and  pass  for  true  piety,  so  long  as  men 
shall  judge  one  another :  But  when  God  shall  judge  us  all, 
it  must  give  an  account  of  itself  to  him,  who  is  no  respecter 
of  persons."^" 

From  this  most  just  and  accurate  account  of  schism^ 
where  a  borrowed  ray  from  the  true  light  of  the  gospel 
shines  in  every  period,  we  may  clearly  see  what  it  isj  which 
*'  the  great  law  of  charity"  requires  of  us.  It  is  not  ta 
£nd  excuses  for  those  who  prefer  any  communion  of  their 
own  invention  to  that  of  the  Christian  church,  and  would 
convert  into  a  Babel  of  confusion,  what  was  designed  to 
be  "  as  a  city  that  is  at  unity  in  itself."  This  is  but  a  poor 
sort  of  charity,  which  has  nothing  to  bestow  but  indulgence 
for  error,  and  would  rather  allow  the  misguided  traveller 
to  lose  his  way  and  perish,  than  be  at  any  pains  to  show 
him  the  path  of  life,  or  that  light  from  above,  which 
"  would  guide  his  feet  into  the  way  of  peace."  When  we 
are  taught  to  pray,  in  one  of  the  collects  of  our  church, 
that  God  would  "  pour  into  our  hearts  that  most  excellent 
gift  of  charit}^,  the  very  bond  of  peace,  and  of  all  virtues," 
we  are  thereby  put  in  mind,  that  the  gift,  which  we  thus 
implore  from  heaven,  is  given  for  the  sole  purpose  of  bind^ 
ing  us  together  in  peace  and  unity  on  earth ;  and  when  it 
ceases  to  operate  in  this  manner,  it  is  no  longer  that  true 

*  See  '*  A  Letter  to  the  Church  of  England^  pointing  out  some  popular 
errors  of  bad  consequence,-  by  an  old  friend  and  servant  to  the  church  ;'* 
publishect  with  the  ether  works  of  th«  Rev.  William  Jones- 


534    Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland* 

Christian  charity  which  is  founded  in  faith,  and  supported 
by  hope,  and  can  no  more  exist  without  these  two,  than 
the  end  can  be  obtained  without  using  the  means.  While, 
therefore,  we  pray  for  the  gift  oi  charity^  as  persons  united 
in  one  hope  of  our  calling,  we  must  also  contend  for  the 
one  faith^  which  was  once  delivered  to  the  saints  ;  and  of 
this  faith,  we  are  taught  to  receive  the  belief  of  "  the  holy 
catholic  church,"  as  a  most  essential  and  important  article. 

In  this  light  we  have  now  considered  it  very  fully,  and 
in  such  a  manner  as  appears  to  us  to  be  most  consistent 
with  the  design  for  which  it  is  revealed  to  us  in  scripture, 
and  has  always  made  a  part  of  the  Christian  creed.  If  the 
view  we  have  taken  of  it,  shall  be  considered  as  exhibiting 
a  strong  attachment  on  our  part  to  that  side  of  the  contro- 
versy, which  the  opposers  of  our  principles  have  thought 
proper  to  distinguish  by,  what  they  suppose  to  be,  the' 
odious  appellation  of  Hi^^h-Church^  we  have  only  to  answer, 
in  the  words  of  a  distinguished  prelate  of  the  church  of 
England,  that  "  we  are  not  to  be  scared  from  our  duty  by 
the  idle  terror  of  a  nick-name,  artfully  applied  in  violation 
of  the  true  meaning  of  the  %¥ord,"  to  bring  discredit  on  the 
principles  of  those  who,  disclaiming  any  sort  of  divine 
right  to  those  powers,  honours  and  emoluments,  with 
which  the  priesthood  may  be  adorned  by  the  wisdom  or 
piety  of  the  civil  power,  are  yet  anxious  to  maintain  the 
importance  of  its  spiritual  commission,  and  not  ashamed  to 
acknowledge,  that  there  is  in  the  sacred  character  somewhat 
more  divine  than  may  belong  to  the  mere  hired  servants  of 
the  state,  even  that  spiritual  authority  which  is  necessary 
for  the  administration  of  Christ's  spiritual  kingdom.  Ac- 
cording to  this  sense  of  the  word,  adds  the  learned  and 
venerable  Bishop  Horsley,  "  we  must  be  content  to  be 
High-Churchmen^  or  we  cannot  be  churchmen  at  all.  For 
he  who  thinks  of  God's  ministers,  as  the  mere  servants  of 
the  state,  is  out  of  the  church — severed  from  it  by  a  kind, 
of  self-excommunication. — But  for  those  who  have  been 


particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    335 

S5urtufed  in  its  bosom,  and  have  gained  admission  to  its 
ministry,  if  from  a  mean  compliance  with  the  humour  of 
the  age,  or  ambitious  of  the  fame  of  liberality  of  senti- 
ment (for  under  that  specious  name,  a  profane  indifference 
is  made  to  pass  for  an  accomplishment)  they  affect  to  join  in 
the  disavowal  of  the  authority  which  they  share,  or  are  si- 
lent, when  the  validity  of  their  divine  commission  is  called 
in  question ;  for  any,  I  hope,  they  are  few,  who  hide  this 
weakness  of  faith,  this  poverty  of  religious  principle,  un- 
der the  attire  of  a  gown  and  cassock,  they  are  in  my  estima** 
tion  little  better  than  infidels  in  masquerade."* 

This,  we  trust,  will  serve  as  an  apology  for  the  attempt 
that  has  now  been  made  to  vindicate  the  principles,  and 
support  the  sacred  character,  of  the  bishops  and  clergy  of 
the  Scotch  Episcopal  church.  That  "  the  validity  of  our 
divine  commission  has  been  called  in  question,"  in  a  man- 
ner which  we  surely  did  not  provoke,  and  from  a  quarter 
where  we  could  hardly  have  expected  to  meet  with  such 
severe,  unhandsome  treatment,  is  a  fact  which  cannot  be 
doubted  by  any  one,  who  reads  with  attention  those  parts 
of  Dr.  Campbell's  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical  History^  which 
are  particularly  levelled  against  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 
and  who  at  the  same  time  is  acquainted  with  the  history  of 
that  Episcopacy  for  at  least  a  century  past,  and  knows  how 
little  foundation  there  was  for  such  a  violent  and  unexpected 
attack.  From  this  consideration,  perhaps  it  may  be  in- 
ferred, that  the  weapons  of  an  adversary  so  incautiously 
aimed,  might  have  been  allowed  to  spend  their  force,  and 
fall  harmless  to  the  ground.  It  may  no  doubt  be  thought 
a  needless  waste  both  of  time  and  labour,  to  employ  them 
in  the  refutation  of  arguments  which,  like  all  those  that 
have  ever  been  produced  against  Episcopacy  in  general, 
have  been  already  so  often  refuted;    or  even  to  take  so 

*  See  the  truly  excellent  charge  delivered  by  Dr.  Horsley,  when  Bi- 
shop of  St.  David's,  to  the  clergy  of  his  diocese,  at  his  primary  visita- 
tion in  the  year  1790, 


336    Particular-  Defence  of  the  Episcopaey  of  Scotland, 

much  pains  in  defending  our  own  Episcopacy  in  particular, 
from  an  attack,  which  has  nothing  but  its  novelty,  and 
perhaps  the  character  of  its  author  to  support  it.  With 
jespect  to  the  former,  we  have  already  said  all  that  is 
necessary  to  show,  how  little  strength  there  is  in  it.  la 
regard  to  the  latter,  we  could  wish  to  say  nothing;  be- 
cause we  are  well  awafe  how  much  weight  will  be  thought 
due  to  it. 

Far  be  it  from  us  to  say  any  thing  that  could  be  supposed 
to  detract  from  the  personal  worth,  and  purity  of  morals, 
which  distinguished  the  character  of  Dr.  Campbell.  We 
know  him  to  have  been,  in  general,  as  his  biographer 
justly  describes  him — "  a  man  of  a  mild  disposition,  and 
even  temper,  and  who  was  not  much  subject  to  passion." 
We  recollect  with  pleasure  the  opinion  delivered  by  him  in 
favour  of  a  repeal  of  the  penal  laws,  which,  in  times  of  civil 
commotion,  had  been  passed  against  the  Scotch  Episcopa~ 
lians,  as  well  as  against  those  of  the  Roman  catholic  persua* 
sion.  And  as  far  as  we  were  concerned  in  the  relief  which 
was  obtained  from  the  severity  of  these  statutes,  all  due 
acknowledgment  was  made,  for  the  friendly  part  which 
Dr.  Campbell  had  acted  in  recommending  the  measure,  as 
reasonable  in  itself,  and  what,  he  thought,  would  be  gene- 
rally agreeable  to  the  established  church  of  Scotland.  To 
express  our  gratitude  on  that  occasion  to  him,  and  to  every 
one  else  who  had  any  hand  in  procuring  for  us  the  tolera- 
tion which  we  nov/  happily  enjoy,  was  both  our  bounden 
duty,  and  our  earnest  desire;  and  we  cannot  charge  our- 
selves with  any  neglect  of  what  was  so  justly  incumbent  on 
us.  Yet  our  spiritual  character  we  must  regard  as  of  infi- 
nitely greater  consequence,  than  any  temporal  indulgence 
ivhich  we  can  possibly  meet  with:  And  as  it  was  Dr. 
Campbell's  avowed  opinion,  that  "  true  religion  never  flou- 
rished so  much,  nor  spread  so  rapidly  as  when,  instead  of 
persecuting,  it  was  persecuted,  and  instead  of  obtaining  sup- 
port from  human  sanctions,  it  had  all  the  terrors  of  the  ma- 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland,    337 

gistrate,  and  the  laws  armed  against  it,"*  we  have  some 
reason  to  suspect,  that  the  removal  of  these  terrors  was 
considered  as  no  great  support  to  our  cause,  while  room 
was  left  to  beat  it  down  from  another  quarter,  and  a  proof 
of  the  invalidity  of  our  clerical  orders  was  thought  to  be  a 
severer  blow  than  any  effect  of  fines  and  imprisonments. 
Relieved  as  we  have  been  from  the  latter  by  the  clemency 
of  government,  we  must  still  feel  the  weight  of  the  former, 
if  not  repelled  by  the  force  of  those  arguments,  which 
the  cause  we  have  to  maintain  so  plentifully  affords :  And 
should  these  be  found  to  fail  in  producing  the  designed  ef- 
fect on  every  unprejudiced  mind,  it  must  be  owing  to  the 
weakness  with  which  they  are  urged,  and  not  to  any  want 
of  strength  in  the  arguments  themselves.  One  thing  we 
wish  to  be  constantly  remembered,  that  this  dormant  con- 
troversy has  not  been  revived  on  our  part  from  any  other 
motive  than  what  has  arisen  from  absolute  necessity :  And 
whatever  has  been  said  in  the  course  of  our  reasoning 
against  some  of  the  positions  laid  down  by  Dr.  Calhpbell, 
has  been  brought  forward  entirely  in  our  own  defence,  and 
to  assert  our  right  to  that  firm  ground,  on  which  the  belief 
of  Episcopacy  as  a  divine  institution  ha?  hitherto  rested 
with  inviolable  security. 

Had  our  Professor's  Theological  Lectures  been  confined 
to  the  chair  from  which  they  were  delivered,  and  reached 
no  farther  than  the  circle  of  his  pupils,  we  should  not  have 
been  obliged  to  take  any  notice  even  of  that  part  of  them 
which  was  directly  intended  to  oppose  the  principles  and 
pretensions  of  what  he  calls  the  "  Scotch  Episcopal  party  ;" 
because,  as  an  established  Lecturer,  he  had  a  right  to  in- 
struct his  students  as  he  thought  proper,  in  the  peculiar 
tenets  of  his  own  and  their  profession.  But  when  these 
instructions  were  committed  to  the  press,  and  published  to 

•  See  his  "  Address  to  the  people  of  Scotland,  on  the  alarms  which  had  - 
been  raised  by  the  bill  in  favour  of  the  Roman  Catholics." 

43 


338   Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland, 

the  world,  for  the  evident  purpose  of  impressing  on  the 
public  mind,  not  only  a  mean  and  unfavourable  idea  of  the 
established  form  of  church  government  in  the  other  part 
of  the  kingdom,  but  a  thorough  contempt  of  what  still  re- 
mains of  the  ancient  establishment  of  this  country,  we 
could  not  allow  ourselves  to  be  wholly  silent  on  a  subject, 
with  which  our  best  and  dearest  interests  are  so  intimately 
connected,  nor  suffer  the  Episcopal  church  of  Scotland  to 
appear  as  without  a  friend  in  the  day  of  her  humiliation, 
complaining  as  it  were,  in  the  words  of  the  prophet,  "  that 
there  was  none  to  take  her  by  the  hand,  of  all  the  sons 
that  she  had  brought  up." — If  it  shall  be  said,  that  the  ap- 
pearance we  have  now  made  in  her  defence  would  not  have 
been  attempted,  had  the  person  himself  been  alive,  out  of 
whose  hands  we  have  endeavoured  to  rescue  her  credit  and 
character,  it  may  be  sufficient  to  answer,  that  if  he  had  in- 
tended the  attack  to  be  make  in  such  an  open  and  public 
manner,  he  would  have  conducted  it  after  a  different  form, 
and  so  as  to  have  exhibited  a  more  satisfying  evidence  of 
the  truth  of  what  has  been  said  in  his  favour,  "  that  he 
was  uncommonly  liberal  to  those  who  differed  from  him  in 
religious  opinions."  If,  indeed,  he  was  so  liberal  to  the 
infidel  Hume,  as  "  to  expunge  or  soften  every  expression 
that  either  was  severe,  or  was  only  supposed  to  be  offen- 
sive,"^ in  his  controversy  with  that  sceptical  philosopher, 
we  might  hope,  that  he  would  have  been  no  less  so  to  a 
society,  or  even  "  party,"  as  he  calls  them,  professing  to  be 
Christians,  and  avowing  a  sincere  and  uniform  belief  in 
all  the  great  truths  of  divine  revelation.f    But  if  we  must 

•  See  the  Account  of  his  Life  mid  Writings,  prefixed  to  his  Lectures, 
p.  16. 

f  We  have  already  taken  some  distant  notice  of  the  favourable  opi- 
nion Mrhich  Dr.  Campbell  entertained  of  the  sentiments  professed  by  one 
of  the  most  insidious  and  inveterate  enemies  of  Christianity,  and  shall 
now  produce  a  more  direct  proof  of  it,  in  the  following  letter  written 
by  our  Professor  to  Mr.  Strahan,  the  printer,  and  dated — June  25,  1776 


Particular  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland.    839 

not  presume  to  call  in  question  the  assurance  given  to  the 
public,  that  these  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical  History  were 
transcribed,  and  revised,  and  prepared  for  the  press  by  the 
author  himself,  we  can  only  regret  that  we  are  obliged  to 
rely  on  the  truth  of  this  information ;  and  in  that  case  may 
justly  apply  an  observation  which  was  made  on  a  similar 
occasion,  that  "  when  an  author  charges  his  blunderbuss 
to  be  fired  off  by  his  executors,  it  looks  as  if  he  himself 
was  afraid  of  the  recoil." 

We  shall  now  take  our  leave  of  Dr.  Campbell,  with 
much  concern  for  having  been  compelled  to  accompany  him 
so  long  through  that  thorny  field  of  controversy  into  which 

"  I  have  lately  read  ovef  one  of  youf  last  winter's  publications  with 
very  great  pleasure,  and,  I  hope,  some  instruction.  My  expectationa 
were  indeed  high  when  I  began  it;  but  I  assure  you,  the  enterta.nment 
I  rece  ved,  greatly  exceeded  them.  What  made  me  fall  to  it  with  the 
greater  avidity  was,  that  it  had  in  part  a  pretty  close  connection  with  a 
subject  I  had  occasion  to  treat  sometimes  in  my  theological  lectures,  to 
wit,  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  hierarchy  :  And  you  will  believe,  that 
1  was  not  the  less  pleased  to  discover,  in  an  historian  of  so  much  learn- 
ing and  penetration,  so  great  a  coincidence  with  my  own  sentiments,  in 
relation  to  some  obscure  points  in  the  Christian  antiquities.  I  suppose,  I 
need  not  now  inform  you,  that  the  book  I  mean  is  Gibbon's  History  of 
the  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,  which,  in  respect  of  the  style  and  man- 
ner, as  well  as  the  matter,  is  a  most  masterly  performance." — See  Mis-' 
cellaneous  Works  of  Ediuard  Gibbon,  Esq.  &c,  published  in  2  vols,  quarto, 
by  John  Lord  Sheffield,  1796.  In  this  letter  we  cannot  but  observe  the 
most  unqualified  approbation  given  to  a  work,  which,  even  from  what 
was  then  published  of  it,  justified  too  well  the  remark  that  was  after- 
wards made  on  the  whole,  that — *'  the  author  often  makes,  where  he 
cannot  readily ^/2^,  an  occasion  to  insult  our  religion;  which  he  hates  so 
cordially,  that  he  might  seem  to  revenge  some  personal  injury."  Yet  a 
coincidence  in  sentiment,  with  respect  to  "  some  obscure  points  in  the 
Christian  antiquities,"  was  sufficient  to  make  our  theological  Lecturer 
applaud,  in  the  most  flattering  terms,  this  avowed  hater  of  Christianity. 
It  was  enough  to  secure  every  encomium  which  Dr.  Campbell  could  be- 
stow, that  this  impious  scoiFer  at  the  worship  and  worshippers  of  Christ 
held  the  same  opinions  as  those  which  the  Doctor  himself  maintained,  in 
relation  to  the  "  rise  and  progress"  of,  what  they  both  join  in  making 
the  constant  butt  of  their  raillery— ths  hierarchy. 


340    Partkulair  Defence  of  the  Episcopacy  of  Scotland. 

we  have  been  reluctantly  dragged.     Nothing  could  have 
induced  us  to  enter  on  it  but  an  imperious  sense  of  duty, 
demanding  every  effort  in  our  power  to  protect  our  ecclesi- 
astical polity  from  the  effects  of  that  sharp  and  severe  treat- 
ment which  it  has  unfortunately  experienced  at  the  hands 
of  one  of  the  most  distinguished  of  our  countr^^men.     It  is 
with  pain  that  we  reflect  on  a  great  part  of  the  publication 
now  before  us^  and  hence  unhappily  feel  a  diminution  of 
that  respect  which  we  would  gladly  have  entertained  for 
the  memory  of  Dr.  Campbell.     He  has,  however,  afforded 
us  an  opportunity  of  reviewing  the  grounds  on  which  our 
principles  have  so  long  stood  firm  and  unshaken,  resisting 
all  the  force  of  irony  and  declamation,  even  when  aided  by 
the  still  more  powerful  influence  of  worldly  interest.    And 
having  thus,  as  we  think,  fully  established  what  was  pro- 
posed as  the  subject  of  this  chapter, — that  a  part  of  the 
holy,  catholic  and  apostolic  church  of  Christ,  though  de- 
prived of  the  support  of  civil  establishment,  does  still  exist 
in  this  country  under  the  name  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal 
Churchy  whose  doctrine,  discipline  and  worship  have  been 
happily  found  to  agree  with  that  of  the  first  and  purest  ages 
of  Christianity;  it  will  now,  we  trust,  be  an  easy  matter 
to  show  that  these  ought  to  be  steadily  adhered  to  by  all 
who  profess  to  be  of  the  Episcopal  communion  in  this  part 
of  the  kingdom;  the  showing  which,  in  as  plain,  inoffen- 
sive,  and  concise  terms  as  possible,  will,   in  our  humble 
opinion,  form  a  very  suitable  conclusion  to  the  design  for 
which  these  persons  have  been  addressed  on  the  present 
occasion. 


APPENDIX 


No.  I. 


The  following  List  of  Consecrations,  with  their  dates, 
and  the  names  of  the  consecrators,  as  extracted  from  their 
ecclesiastical  register,  will  give  a  clear  and  distinct  view  of 
the  Episcopal  succession  in  Scotland  since  the  Revolution, 
as  far  as  the  present  bishops  are  concerned. 

Januarif  25,  1705.  Mr.  John  Sage,  formerly  one  of 
the  ministers  of  Glasgow,  and  Mr.  John  Fullarton, 
formerly  minister  of  Paisley,  were  consecrated  at  Edin- 
burgh by  John  Paterson,  Archbishop  of  Glasgow,  Alex- 
ander Rose,  Bishop  of  Edinburgh,  and  Robert  Douglas, 
Bishop  of  Dunblane.^  Bishop  Sage  died  in  June^  1711.^ 
Bishop  Fullarton  succeeded  Bishop  Rose,  as  Bishop  of 
Edinburgh,  in  1720,  and  died  in  May^  1727. 

April  28,  1709.  Mr.  John  Falcon ar,  minister  at 
Cairnbee,  and  Mr.  Henry  Christie,  minister  at  Kinross, 
were  consecrated  at  Dundee,  by  Bishop  Rose,  of  Edin- 
burgh, Bishop  Douglas,  of  Dunblane,  and  Bishop  Sage. 
Bishop  Christie  died  in  1718,  and  Bishop  Fakonar  i?i  1723. 

August  25 y  1711.  The  honourable  Archibald  Camp- 
bell, who  had  been  long  in  priest's  orders,  and  resided 
mostly  in  London,  was  consecrated  at  Dundee,  by  Bishop 

•  Archbishop  Paterson,  Bishop  Rose,  and  Bishop  Douglas,  with  the 
other  bishops  of  Scotland,  were  deprived  at  the  Revolution  by  the  civi! 
power,  because  JEpiscopacy  had  been  voted  an  insupportable  grievance  by 
thi  Scotch  convention. 


342  AppendiiC. 

Rose  of  Edinburgh,  Bishop  Douglas  of  Dunblane,  and 
Bishop  Falconar.  He  was  elected  Bishop  of  Aberdeen  in 
1721,  which  charge  he  resigned  in  1724 — and  died  yune 
16,  1744. 

February  24,  1712.  Mr.  James  Gadderar,  formerly 
minister  at  Kilmaurs,  was  consecrated  at  London  by  Bishop 
Hickes,^  Bishop  Falconar,  and  Bishop  Campbell.  He 
was  appointed  Bishop  of  Aberdeen  in  1724,  and  died  in 
February^  1733. 

October  22,  1718.  Mr.  Arthur  Millar,  formerly 
minister  at  Inveresk,  and  Mr.  William  Irvine,  formerly 
minister  at  Kirkmichael,  in  Carrick,  were  consecrated  at 
Edinburgh,  by  Bishop  Rose  of  Edinburgh,  Bishop  Ful- 
larton,  and  Bishop  Falconar.  Bishop  Irvine  died  Novetri' 
ber  9,  1725.  Bishop  Millar  succeeded  Bishop  Fullarton, 
as  Bishop  of  Edinburgh,  and  Primus,'\  and  died  October  9, 
1727. 

After  the  death  of  Bishop  Rose  of  Edinburgh,  which 
happened  March  20,  1720, 

October  17, 1722.  Mr.  Andrew  Cant,  formerly  one  of 
the  ministers  of  Edinburgh,  and  Mr.  David  Freebairn, 
formerly  minister  of  Dunning,  were  consecrated  at  Edin- 
burgh, by  Bishop  Fullarton,  Pri?nus^  Bishop  Millar,  and 

'*  Dr.  George  Hickes,  formerly  dean  of  Worcester,  was  consecrated 
in  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough's  chapel,  in  the  parish  of  Enfield,  Fe- 
bruary 23d,  1693,  by  Dr.  William  Lloyd,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  Dr. 
Francis  Turner,  Bishop  of  Ely,  and  Dr.  Thomas  White,  Bishop  of 
Peterborough.  Dr.  Lloyd,  Dr.  Turner,  and  Dr.  White,  were  three  of 
the  English  bishops  who  weie  deprived,  at  the  Revolution,  by  the  civil 
power,  for  not  swearing  allegiance  to  William  IIL  They  were  also  three 
of  the  seven  bishops  who  had  been  sent  to  the  Tower  by  James  IL  for 
refusing  to  order  an  illegal  proclamation  to  be  read  in  tlieir  dioceses. 

t  Anciently  no  bishop  in  Scotland  had  the  title  of  Archbishop,  but  one 
of  them  had  a  precedency,  under  the  title  of  Primus  Scatice  Episcopus. 
In  consequence  of  the  revolution,  after  the  death  of  Bishop  Rose  of  Edin- 
burgh, the  Scotch  bishops  reassumed  the  old  form,  one  of  them  being 
elected  Primus,  with  power  of  convocating  and  presiding,  according  tc 
their  canons  made  in  1743. 


Appendix,  343 

Bishop  Irvine.  Bishop  Cant  died  in  1721.  Bishop  Free- 
bairn  was  elected  Primus  in  1731,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Edinburgh,  and  died  in  1 739. 

June  4,  1727.  Dr.  Thomas  Rattray,  of  Craighall, 
was  consecrated  at  Edinburgh  by  Bishop  Gadderar,  Bishop 
Millar,  and  Bishop  Cant.  He  was  appointed  Bishop  of 
Dunkeld,  succeeded  Bishop  Freebairn  as  Primus^  and  died 
May  12,  1743. 

June  18,  1727.  Mr.  William  Dunbar,  formerly  mi- 
nister^ at  Cruden,  and  Mr.  Robert  Keith,  presbyter  in 
Edinburgh,  were  consecrated  at  Edinburgh,  by  Bishop 
Gadderar,  Bishop  Millar,  and  Bishop  Rattray.  Bishop 
Dunbar  was  first  appointed  Bishop  of  Moray,  and  after- 
wards of  Aberdeen,  on  the  death  of  Bishop  Gadderar  in 
1733.  He  died  in  1746.  Bishop  Keith  was  first  appointed 
Bishop  of  Caithness,  afterwards  of  Fife.  He  was  elected 
Primus  after  the  death  of  Bishop  Rattray,  and  died  in 
January^  1756. 

June  24,  1735.  Mr.  Robert  White,  presbyter  at 
Cupar  in  Fife,  was  consecrated  at  Carsebank,  near  Forfar, 
by  Bishop  Rattray,  Bishop  Dunbar,  and  Bishop  Keith. — 
He  was  appointed  Bishop  of  Dunblane,  succeeded  Bishop 
Keith  as  Primus^  and  died  in  August^  1761. 

September  10,  1741.  Mr.  William  Falconar,  pres- 
byter at  Forres,  was  consecrated  at  Alloa,  by  Bishop  Rat- 
tray, Primus^  Bishop  Keith,  and  Bishop  White.  He  was 
first  appointed  Bishop  of  Caithness,  afterwards  of  Moray; 
succeeded  Bishop  White  as  Primus^  and  died  in  1 784. 

October  4,  1742.  Mr.  James  Rait,  presbyter  at  Dun- 
dee, was  consecrated  at  Edinburgh  by  Bishop  Rattray, 
Primus^  Bishop  Keith,  and  Bishop  White.  He  was  ap- 
pointed Bishop  of  Brechin,  and  died  in  1 777. 

*  Those  clergymen,  who,  in  consequence  of  the  Revolution,  were 
deprived  of  their  parishes,  are  in  this  list  called  ministers:  And  those 
who  had  not  been  parish-ministers,  under  the  civil  establishment,  are 
czViQdi  presbyters. 


344  Appendix. 

August  19,  1743.  Mr.  John  Alexander,  presbyter  at 
Alloa,  was  consecrated  at  Edinburgh  by  Bishop  Keith, 
Primus^  Bishop  White,  Bishop  Falconar,  and  Bishop  Rait. 
He  was  appointed  Bishop  of  Dunkeld,  and  died  iii  1776, 

July  17,  1747.  Mr.  Andrew  Gerard,  presbyter  in 
Aberdeen,  was  consecrated  at  Cupar,  in  Fife,  by  Bishop 
White  (having  commission  from  Bishop  Keith,  the  Primus^ 
for  that  effect),  Bishop  Falconar,  Bishop  Rait,  and  Bishop 
Alexander.  He  was  appointed  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  and 
died  in  October,  1767. 

June  24,  1762.  Mr.  Robert  Forbes,  presbyter  in 
Leith,  was  consecrated  at  Forfar  by  Bishop  Falconar, 
Primus,  Bishop  Alexander,  and  Bishop  Gerard.  He  was 
appointed  Bishop  of  Ross  and  Caithness,  and  died  in  1776. 

September  21,  1768.  Mr.  Robert  Kilgour,  presbyter 
in  Peterhead,  was  consecrated  at  Cupar,  in  Fife,  by  Bishop 
Falconar,  Primus,  Bishop  Rait,  and  Bishop  Alexander. 
He  was  appointed  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  succeeded  Bishop 
Falconar  as  Primus,  in  1 784,  and  died  March  22,  1 790. 

August  24,  1774.  Mr.  Charles  Rose,  presbyter  at 
Down,  was  consecrated  at  Forfar,  by  Bishop  Falconar, 
Primus^  Bishop  Rait,  and  Bishop  Forbes.  He  was  first 
appointed  Bishop  of  Dunblane,  afterwards  of  Dunkeld,  and 
died  in  April,  1791. 

June  27,  1776.  Mr.  Arthur  Petrie,  presbyter  at 
MicklefoUa,  in  Fyvie,  was  consecrated  at  Dundee,  by  Bi- 
shop Falconar,  Primus,  Bishop  Rait,  Bishop  Kilgour,  and 
Bishop  Rose.  He  was  first  appointed  co-adjutor  to  Bishop 
Falconar,  whom  he  afterwards  succeeded  as  Bishop  of 
Moray,  and  died  April  19,  1787. 

September  25,  1782.  Mr.  John  Skinner,  presbyter  in 
Aberdeen,  was  consecrated  in  the  chapel  at  Luthermuir, 
by  Bishop  Kilgour,  Primus^  Bishop  Rose  and  Bishop  Petrie. 
He  was  appointed  coadjutor  to  Bishop  Kilgour,  on  whose 
resignation  he  succeeded  to  the  charge  of  the  diocese  of 


Appendix.  JH^ 

Aberdeen,  In  October,  1786,  and  was  elected  Primus  itk 

December,  1788. 

Mirch  7,  1787.  Mr.  Andhew  Macfarlane,  presby* 
ler  in  Inverness,  was  consecrated  at  Peterhead,  by  Bishop 
Kilg^oar,  Primus^  Bishop  Petrie,  and  Bishop  Skinner.  He 
was  appointed  coadjutor  to  Bishop  Petrie,  whom  he  suo 
needed  soon  after,  as  Bishop  of  Ross  and  Moray. 

September  26,  1787.  Dr.  William  Abernethy  Drum* 
MOtiD,  one  of  the  presbyters  of  Edinburgh,  and  Mr.  JoHi^ 
Strachan,  presbyter  in  Dundee,  were  consecrated  at 
Peterhead,  by  Bishop  Kilgour,  Primus^  Bishop  Skinner, 
and  Bishop  Macfarlane.  Bishop  Aberaethy  Drummond 
was  first  appointed  Bishop  of  Brechin,  and  afterwards  of 
Edinburgh,  which  having  also  resigned,  he  is  now  Bishop 
of  Glasgow.  Bishop  Strachan  succeeded  him  as  Bishop  of 
Brechin. 

September  20,  1792.  Mr.  Jonathan  Watson,  pres- 
byter at  Laurence-kirk,  was  consecrated  at  Stonehaven, 
by  Bishop  Skinner,  Primus^  Bishop  Macfarlane,  Bishop 
Abernethy  Drummond,  and  Bishop  Strachan.  He  was 
appointed  Bishop  of  D unkeld,  that  diocese  being  vacant 
by  the  death  of  Bishop  Rose. 

June  24,  1796.  Mr.  Alexander  Jolly,  presb^^ter  at 
Fraserburgh,  was  consecrated  at  Dundee,  by  Bishop  i\.ber* 
nethy  Drummond,  Bishop  Macfarlane,  and  Bishop  Stra-* 
chan.  He  was  appointed  coadjutor  to  Bishop  Macfarlane, 
on  whose  resignation  he  succeeded  soon  after  to  the  charge 
of  the  diocese  of  Moray.* 

Though  the  districts  into  which  the  Scotch  bishops  have 
<!ivided  their  church  are  not  exactly  according  to  the  limits 
of  the  dioceses  under  the  legal  establishment  of  Episco- 
pacy,  yet  they  still  retain  the  names,  by  which  they  were 

*  A  few  more  presbyters  have  been  coiisecrated  bishops  in  Scotland 
since  the  revolution ;  but  as  they  had  no  hand  in  carrying  on  the  Episco- 
pal succession,  it  was  thought  unnecessary,  in  making  out  this  list,  ta 
mention  their  consecrations. 

44 


546  Appendix. 

of  old  distinguished,  with  the  exception  of  Fife,  instead 
of  St.  Andrews.  Every  diocesan  bishop  has  his  distinct 
charge,  and  without  assuming  any  other  local  jurisdiction 
than  what  was  acknowledged  in  the  primitive  church  for 
the  first  three  centuries,  may  as  properly  be  denominated 
-bishop  of  the  place  or  charge  assigned  to  him,  as  St.  James 
has  always  been  called  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  Ignatius,  Bi- 
shop of  Antioch,  or  Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage.  On  this 
footing  the  Episcopal  college  in  Scotland  consists  at  prc^ 
sent  of  the  following  members. 

Mr.  John  Skinner,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen^  and  Primus* 
Mr.  Andrew  Macfarlane,  Bishop  of  i?05^. 
Dr.  Abernethy  Drummond,  Bishop  of  Glasgow, 
Mr.  John  Stachan,  Bishop  of  Brechin, 
Mr.  Jonathan  Watson,  Bishop  of  Dunkeld. 
Mr.  Alexander  Jolly,  Bishop  of  Moray* 


No.  II. 

X  HE  Letters  of  Consecration  granted  to  Bishop  Sage  in 
ir05,  and  referred  to  in  page  292  of  this  work,  are  thus 
expressed : 

"  Apud  Edinburgum,  die  vicesimo  quinto  mensis  Janu- 
arii,  anno  ab  incarnato  Domino,  et  Servatore  nostro,  mil- 
lesimo,  septingentesimo  quinto. 

NOS — ^Joannes,  providentia  divina,  Archiepiscopus 
Glascuensis,  Alexander,  miseratione  divina,  Episcopus 
Edinburgensis,  et  Robertus,  miseratione  divina,  Episcopus 
Dunblanensis,  in  timore  Domini  ponderantes  pierosque  fra- 
trum  nostrorum  carissimorum,  et  in  coUegio  Episcopali 
collegarum  (hoc  nupere  elapso,  et  ecclesise  nostrse  luctuOso 
curriculo)  in  Domino  obdormiisse,  nosquc  perpaucos  qui 
divina  misericordia  superstites  sumus,  multipiicibus  curis, 


Appendix.  347 

morbis,  atque  ingravescente  senio  tantum  non  confectos 
esse:  Quapropter  ex  eo  quod  Deo  supremo,  Servatori 
nostro,  sacrosanctse  ejus  ecclesise,  et  posteris  debemus,  in 
animum  induximus,  officium,  caracterem,  et  facultatem 
Episcopalem,  aliis  probis,  fidelibus,  ad  docendum  et  regen- 
dum  idoneis  hominibus  committere ;  inter  quos  quum  nobis 
ex  propria  scientia  constet,  reverendum  nostrum  fratrem 
Joannem  Sage,  artium  magistrum,  et  presbvterum  Glas- 
cuensum  tanto  muneri,  aptum  et  idoneum  esse  ;  nos  igitur 
divini  numinis  praesidio  freti,  secundum  gratiam  nobis  con- 
cessam,  die,  mense,  anno  suprascriptis,  in  sacrario  Domus 
archiepiscopi  Glascuensis,  supradictum  Joannem  Sage,  or- 
dinavimus,  consecravimus,  et  in  nostrum  Episcopale  colle- 
gium co-optavimus.  In  cujus  rei  testimonium,  Sigilla 
Joannis  Archiepiscopi  Glascuensis,  et  Alexandri  Episcopi 
Edinburgensis,  (sedis  Sancti  Andreae  nunc  vacantis  vicarii) 
huic  instrumento  (chirographis  nostris  prius  munito)  ap- 
pend! mandavimus. 

Jo.  Glascuen. 
Sic  subscrib.  Alexr.  Edinburgen. 

Ro.  DUNBLANEN. 

(Log.  Sigil.  Episcop.  Edinb.)  (Loc.  Sigil.  Archiepis.  Glas.) 

In  some  of  the  subsequent  deeds  or  instruments  of  con- 
secration, we  find  a  still  more  direct  reference  to  the  pre-  • 
servation  of  the  Episcopal  succession.  They  are  expres- 
•sed  in  the  following  terms : 

NOS — &c. -Afflictissimse  hujus,  cui  nos  Deus  prse- 

posuit,  ecclesiae  Scoticanse  concordise,  paci,  unitati  atque 
ordini  qua  licet  et  quantum  in  tantis  et  talibus  angustiis 
possumus  consulentes,  dilectissimo  in  Christo  fratri  — 
presbytero,  et  pastore  de ,  quern  hodie  in  colle- 
gium nostrum  Episcopale  consecrando  co-optavimus,  ejus- 
dem  ecrlcsire  Scoticanae  portionemj  quse  in  provincia  ceu 


$4t  Appendix. 

ditione  j.i  w  Dco  militat,  specialem  commendamus,  ejtrs- 
que  curae  Episcopali,  usque  quo  clementior  Deus  ecclesisB 
suae,  sui  Christi  sponsae  in  hoc  terrarum  angulo- — heu 
quantum  laboranti!  benignius  prospexerit:  Hoc  etiam 
imum  ardentissimis  adjicientes  votis,  ut  in  Domino  confi- 
tus,  nuUisque  persecutionum  procellis  territus,  praedictus 
frater,  ne  quando  summus  simul  at  sacerrimus  orthodoxot 
rum  Episcoporum  ordo  per  legitimam  ordinationum  suc- 
cessionem  continuatus  deficiat,  ceu  disperdatur,  solicitus 
advigilet.    Datum,  &c.  •^^-^ 


No.  III. 

ARTICLES  OF  UNION 

Proposed  btj  the  Right  Reverend  the  Bishops  of  the  Scotch 
Episcopal  Church,  to  those  Clergymen  who  officiate 
in  Scotland  by  virtue  of  Ordination  from  an  English  or 
an  Irish  Bishop, 

As  an  union  of  all  those  who  profess  to  be  of  the  Episco- 
pal persuasion  in  Scotland,  appears  to  be  a  measure  ex* 
tremely  desirable,  and  calculated  to  promote  the  interests 
of  true  religion ;— .The  Right  Reverend  the  Bishops  of  the 
Scotch  Episcopal  Church  do  invite  and  exhort  all  those 
clergymen  in  Scotland  who  have  received  ordination  from 
English  or  Irish  bishops,  and  the  people  attending  their 
ministrations,  to  become  pastors  and  members  of  that4)ure 
and  primitive  part  of  the  Christian  church,  of  which  the 
bishops  in  Scotland  are  the  regular  governors : — With  a 
view  to  the  attainment  of  which  desirable  end,  the  said 
bishops  propose  the  following  Articles  of  Union,  as  the 
conditions  on  which  they  are  ready  to  receive  the  above- 
mentioned  clergy  into  a  holy  and  Christian  fellowship,  and 
to  acknowledge  them  as  pastors,  and  the  people  who  shaH 


Appendix.  ..  349 

lie  committed  to  their  charge,  and  duly  and  regularly  ad^ 
here  to  their  ministrations,  as  members  of  the  Scotch  Epis.- 
copal  Church. 

L  Every  such  clergyman  shall  exhibit  to  the  bishop  of  the 
diocese,  or  district  in  which  he  is  settled,  or,  in  case  of  a 
vacancy,  to  the  primus  of  the  Episcopal  college,  his  letters 
of  orders,  or  a  duly  attested  copy  thereof,  that  so,  their  auf 
thenticity  and  validity  being  ascertained,  they  may  be  en- 
tered in  the  diocesan  book,  or  register  kept  for  that  purpose* 

II.  Every  such  clergj^man  shall  declare  his  hearty  and 
unfeigned  assent  to  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  as  re- 
vealed and  set  forth  in  the  holy  scriptures  ; — and  shall  far- 
ther acknov/kdge,  that  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  of 
which  the  bishops  in  Scodand  are  the  regular  governors,  is 
a  pure  and  orthodox  part  of  the  universal  Christian  Church. 

III.  Every  such  clergyman  shall  be  at  liberty  to  use,  in 
his  own  congregation,  the  liturgy  of  the  Church  of  Eng* 
land,  as  well  in  the  administration  of  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  supper,  as  in  all  the  other  offices  of  the  church. 

IV.  Every  such  clergyman,  when  collated  to  any  pasto- 
ral charge,  shall  promise,  with  God's  assistance,  faithfully 
and  conscientiously  to  perform  the  duties  thereof,  promot- 
ing and  maintaining,  according  to  his  power,  peace,  quiet- 
ness, and  Christian  charity,  and  studying  in  a  particular 
manner  to  advance,  by  his  example  and  doctrine,  the  spi- 
ritual welfare  and  comfort  of  that  portion  of  the  flock  of 
Christ,  among  which  he  is  called  to  exercise  his  ministry. 

V.  Every  such  clergyman  shall  own  and  acknowledge,  as 
his  spiritual  governor  under  Christ,  the  bishop  of  the  dio- 
cese or  district  in  which  he  is  settled,  and  shall  pay  and 
perform  to  the  said  bishop,  all  such  canonical  obedience 
as  is  usually  paid  by  the  clergy  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal 
Church,  or  by  the  clergy  of  the  United  Church  of  England 
and  Ireland,  to  their  respective  diocesans ;  saving  and  ex- 
cepting only  such  obedience  as  those  clergymen,  who  do  or 
may  hold  spiritual  preferment  in  England  or  Ireland,  owe 


•350  Appendix* 

to  jthe  bishops,  in  whose  dioceses,  in  those  parts  of  the 
united  kingdom,  they  do  or  may  hold  such  prefennent. 

VI.  Every  such  clergyman,  who  shall  approve  and  ac- 
cept of  the  foregoing  articles,  as  terms  of  agreement  and 
union  with  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  shall  testify  his 
approbation  and  acceptance  of  the  same  in  manner  follow- 
ing, viz. 

"  At ,  the day  of ,  I ,  ordained  dea- 
con by  the  lord  bishop  of ,  and  priest  by  the  lord  bishop 

of  — ,  do  hereby  testify  and  declare  my  entire  approba- 
tion and  acceptance  of  the  foregoing  articles,  as  terms  of 
union  with  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  and  oblige  myself 
to  comply  with,  and  fulfil  the  same  with  all  sincerity  and 
diligence.  In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  written  and  sub- 
scribed this  my  acceptance  and  obligation,  to  be  delivered 

into  the  hands  of  the  Right  Rev. ,  bishop  of ,  as 

my  diocesan  and  ecclesiastical  superior,  before  these  wit- 
nesses, the  Rev. ,  and  the  Rev. ,  both  clergymen 

•f  the  said  diocese,  specially  called  for  that  puipose." 


,(351     ) 


{The  readers  of  this  work  will  doubtless  be  gratijied  xvith 
•  the  following  extract  from  the  review  of  it^  contained  in 
'  the  Anti-Jacobin  Magazine.  This  extract  exhibits  a  re- 
ply to  Dr,  Campbell's  commentary  on  the  zvords  of  Igna- 
tius— "  There  is  but  one  altar,  as  there  is  but  one  bi- 
shop,"^— more  satisfactory  than  that  advanced  by  Bishop 
SkinnerJ] 

Dr.  Campbell  takes  it  for  granted,  that  his  Episcopal 
antagonists  consider  the  unity  in  the  secohd  clause  of  Ig- 
natius's  words  as  the  numerical  or  physical  unity  of  the 
bishop's  person ;  and,  consequently,  that  they  represent 
the  venerable  martyr  as  arguing  thus  :  "  All  the  altars  of 
a  diocese  must  be  one,  because  the  bishop  is  but  one  per- 
son." Ignatius,  however,  neither  argues,  nor  is  supposed 
by  the  advocates  of  Episcopacy  to  argue,  in  this  foolish 
and  senseless  manner.  His  reasoning  is  perfectly  sound, 
although  Dr.  Campbell  has  either  happened,  or  chosen,  to 
misunderstand  it.  The  unity  intended  in  both  clauses  of 
the  sentence  is  of  the  same  kind  ;  and  in  neither  of  them  is 
it  numerical.  In  both  it  is  an  unity,  not  in  respect  of  indi' 
'Didual  existence^  but  in  respect  of  authority^  power^  and 
effect.  All  the  altars  of  a  diocese,  however  numerous  in 
respect  of  place,  are  one ;  because  the  same  (not  numeri- 
cally) eucharistical  service  is,  with  the  same  spiritual  benefit 
to  the  partakers,  performed  at  all  of  them  by  the  one  autho- 
rity of  Christy  derived  to  them  through  the  bishop ;  and 
the  bishop  is  one^  because,  with  respect  to  his  own  diocese, 
he  is  the  original  depositary  of  this  one  authority.  Nor  is 
this  mode  of  phraseology  confined  to  ecclesiastical  subjects  ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  perfectly  common.  We  say  that 
tliere  is  but  one  executive  power  in  the  kingdom  ;  because, 


352  Extract  from  ^he  ^Anti-jfacobin  Revhw* 

although  the  individuals  employed  in  the  execution  of  the 
laws  are  almost  innumerable,  yet  they  all  derive  their 
authority  from  the  one  authority  of  the  king^  who,  in  this 
country,  is  the  sole  fountain  of  power.  We  say  that  the 
act  or  deed  of  any  one  justice  of  the  peace  is  the  same  as 
that  of  any  other ;  not  because  it  is  numerically  the  same,, 
but  because  it  is  of  the  same  validity.  We  say  that  their 
authority  is  the  same,  because^  in  all  of  them  it  is  the  king's 
authority.  In  like  manner  We  say,  that  every  altar  in  the 
diocese  is  the  same  with  every  other  ;  not  because  they  are 
numerically  the  same,  but  because  they  are  all  erected  by 
the  one  authority  of  the  bishop ;  and  because,  of  conse- 
quence, the  eucharist  received  at  one  has  the  same  effect 
as  when  received  at  another. 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that,  in  the  case  of  both  the  king  and 
of  the  bishop,  this  one  authority  happens  to  be  lodged  in 
one  numerical  individual  person.  But  this  is  a  circum- 
stance on  Avhich  the  propriety  of  the  above-mentioned 
modes  of  speech  in  no  degree  depends  ;  and  which,  there- 
fore, as  far  as  our  argument  is  concerned,  is  merely  acci- 
dental. If  we  find  it  difficult  to  abstract  the  idea  of  the 
one  authority  of  the  king  or  of  die  bishop,  from  the  indi- 
viduality of  the  persons  invested  with  it,  the  difficulty  is 
wholly  owing  to  the  power  of  early  and  habitually  con- 
firmed association  ;  for  the  things  themselves  may,  cer- 
tainly, be  separated,  not  in  idea  only,  but  in  fact.  The 
Roman  consuls,  though  numerically  two,  were  possessed 
but  of  one  supreme  authority ;  and  when  that  authority 
was,  occasionally,  lodged,  whether  in  one  dictator,  or  in 
ten  military  tribunes,  it  was  but  one  authority  still.  So  if  it 
had  pleased  our  blessed  Saviour,  or  his  apostles  actings 
under  his  direction,  to  constitute  bishops,  in  all  districts, 
by  pairs,  such  a  constitution  of  the  church  would  have 
made  no  alteration  in  the  force  of  St.  Ignatius's  argument. 
For  then,  the  bishops,  who,  in  respect  of  personality,  were 


Extract  from  the  Anti-Jacohzn  JReview*  353 

two,  would,  in  respect  of  spiritual  authority  and  power^ 
have  been  but  one. 

We  repeat,  therefore,  that  the  quibble  which  Dr.  Camp- 
bell finds  in  the  words  of  Ignatius,  as  explained  by  that 
Father's  Episcopal  commentators,  is  all  his  own ;  and  we 
strongly  suspect  that,  by  a  dialectician  of  his  eminent 
acuteness,  it  would  never  have  been  found,  if  the  weakness 
of  his  argument  had  not  stood  in  need  of  even  this  very 
feeble  support.     For  no  man  knew  better  than  Dr.  Camp- 
bell, that,  in  all  nations  and  languages,  things  are  viewed 
and  spoken  of  as,  in  some  respects,  one^  which,  in  other 
respects,  are  exceedingly  different ;  and  that  physical,  or 
numerical  unity  is,  in  fact,  but  one  of  innumerable  kinds, 
which  are  hourly  conceived  by  the  human  mind,  and  hourly 
expressed  in  human  speech.    But  Dr.  Campbell's  conclusion 
that  "  the  bishop's  cure  was  originally  confined  to  a  single 
church  or  congregation,"  required  that  the  words  h  fiuo-ia- 
s-»/^ov  should  signify  one  individual  "  communion  table  or 
altar;"  and  this  signification  of  them,  he  thinks,  is  suffi- 
ciently secured  by  supposing  hj  I'Ttio-Koxo;  to  mean  the  indivi- 
duality of  the  bishop's   person:   for  otherwise   Ignatius 
would  be  guilty  of  a  quibble.    We  wonder,  indeed,  that 
the  very  words  which  he  quotes  from  Dr.  Bum's  Eccle- 
siastical Law  did  not  show  Dr.  Campbell  the  danger  of 
building  on  such  unfirm  ground.    "  The  cathedral  church,'^ 
says  that  accurate  writer,  "  is  the  parish   church  of  the 
whole  diocese."    The  bishop,  of  course,  and  strictly  speak- 
ing, is  the  pastor  of  the  whole  diocese.     Every  altar  in  it 
is,  therefore,  his  altar.     If  we  wished  to  speak  with  parti- 
cular correctness,  we  might  say  that  it  is  a  representative 
of  his  altar,  meaning  the  altar  of  the  cathedral  church. 
Or  if  we  choose  to  adopt  a  figurative  phraseology^  we  may 
employ  a  language  exactly  analagous  to  that  of  the  cus- 
toms, (which  calls  such  a  sea-port  a  branch  of  the  port  of 
London)  and  say  that  every  altar  in  the  diocese  is  a  branch 
of  the  bishop's  altar. 

45 


A  REVIEW 

OS* 


HAWEIS'  CHURCH  HISTORY, 

IN  WHICH 

THE  ERRORS  AND  MISREPRESENTATIONS  OF  THAT  WORK 
ARE  DETECTED  A^TD  EXPOSED. 

EXTRACTED  FROM  THE  AUTl-JACOBIH  REVIEir. 


REVIEW 

OF 

HAWEIS'  CHURCH  HISTORY. 


IT  was  reserved,  for  our  author  to  publish  a  history  of 
the  church,  for  the  express  purpose  of  proving  that  the 
Church  of  England,  in  which  he  enjoys  a  rich  rectory, 
has  deviated  essentially  from  the  original  church  of  Christ 
in  doctrine,  in  government,  and  in  worship  ;  th^t prelacy  is 
an  usurpation,  and  patronage  contrary  to  the  principles  of 
the  gospel ;  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  people,  when  the  regu- 
lar clergy  preach  unsound  doctrine,  of  which  the  most  il« 
literate  clown  is  a  competent  judge,  to  withdraw  themselves 
from  the  church,  which,  in  consequence,  becomes  schisma- 
tical;  that  all  establishments  of  one  church  in  preference  to 
another,  are  the  offspring  of  a  corrupt  policy  j  that  the  alli^ 
ance  between  church  and  state  has  ever  been  meretricious  ; 
and  that  to  contend  for  the  unity  of  the  church  in  any  thing 
more  than  a  few  articles  of  faith,  of  difficult  comprehension, 
is  to  be  guilty  of  a  sin  enormous  as  that  of  blasphemy. 

Should  any  of  our  readers  be  disposed  to  waste  his  time 
in  attempting  to  conceive  by  what  means  an  ecclesiastical 
historian  reconciles  such  opinions  to  the  concurring  testi- 
mony of  the  fathers  of  the  church,  we  beg  leave  to  assure 
him,  that  Dr.  Haweis  employs  no  means  for  so  vain  a  pur- 
pose. He  is  perfectly  aware  that  his  book  and  the  writings 
of  the  fathers  can  never  be  reconciled ;  but  he  must  consi- 
der this  as  a  matter  of  no  importance,  since  he  represents  al- 
most all  the  Catholic  writers  for  the  first  four  centuries  as 
either  so  very  weak  or  so  very  wicked  as  to  be  unworthy  of 
the  smallest  credit. 


358  Review  of  Hawels*  Church  History* 

He  admits,  indeed,  that  there  was  something  respectable 
in  the  character  of  Augustin,  bishop  of  Hippo,  and  more  in 
that  of  Athanasius  ;  but  he  characterizes  Clemens  of  Rome, 
Ignatius  of  Antioch,  and  Poly  carp  of  Smyrna,  as  very  mean 
writers. 

"  Justin  the  martyr,  Origeny  Tertullian^  Pantcenus,  and 
many  others,  zealous  indeed  in  apologies  for  the  Christian 
cause,  and  ready  to  die  rather  than  renounce  their  profes- 
sion, yet  held  a  Christianity  of  so  equivocal  a  nature,  as  to 
render  it  ver}^  dubious  whether  they  had  any  real  part  of  lot 
in  the  matter."  What  extravagant  enthusiasts  they  must 
have  been  !  Ireneus,  though  he  combated  all  the  heresies 
then  subsisting  in  the  church,  yet  suffered  "  his  philosophic 
opinions  to  mingle  with,  and  debase  the  Christian  purity  P 
and,  of  course,  was  a  heretic  himself! 

"  TertuUian  is  a  striking  instance,  how  much  wisdom  and 
weakness,  learning  and  ignorance,  faith  and  folly,  truth  and 
error,  goodness  and  delusion,  may  be  mixed  up  in  the  com- 
position of  the  same  person  !  Though  Tertullian  himself  af- 
fords but  a  very  wretched  specimen  of  Christianity  ^  his  apo- 
logy  demonstrates^  that  in  all  the  great  and  glorious  features 
of  this  divine  religion,  there  was  a  people  in  that  day  emi- 
nently to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  God* s  grace  /"  We  really 
should  have  thought  that  the  author  of  an  apology  which  de- 
monst rates  this^  must  afford  a  ^o/erai/e  specimen  of  Christi- 
anity ! 

Of  Gregory  Thaumaturgus^  so  highly  praised  by  Cave, 
and  others,  our  impartial  and  charitable  historian  says  :— ^ 
"  I  must  be  exceedingly  hard  drove  for  a  Christian,  before 
I  can  put  such  men  as  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  into  the 
number !"  What  though  St»  Basil^  compares  Gregory  to 
the  prophets  and  apostles,  affirming  that  he  was  actuated  by 
the  same  spirit  with  them,  trod  in  their  footsteps,  and  his 
conversation  in  the  gospel  during  the  whole  course  of  his 

*  De  Spiritu  Sancto.  c,  29. 


Review  of  Haweis^  Church  History.  3B9 

life,  from  the  day  of  his  conversion  to  the  day  of  his  death? 
Basil  was  denominated  the  Great ;  and  "  the  tide  greaty^ 
says  our  author,  when  speaking  of  Constantine,  "  as  far  as 
my  observation  reaches,  usually  marks  the  most  destructive, 
the  most  tyrannical,  and  the  most  murderous  of  mankind." 

The  learning  and  genius  of  Origen  furnish  great  cause  of 
offence  to  Dr.  Haweis,  who  professes  indeed  no  respect  for 
learning  in  any  Christian  divine  antient  or  modern.  Origen, 
it  is  true,  maintained  many  errors  ;  but  our  author  is  the 
first  ecclesiastical  historian,  whom  we  have  met  with,  that 
did  not  acknowledge  his  obligations  to  the  learned  labours 
of  the  presbyter  of  Alexandria.  In  this  he  is,  however,  con- 
sistent ;  for  such  an  acknowledgment  in  behalf  of  Origen 
could  not  reasonably  be  expected  from  that  man,  who  boldly 
pronounces  the  labour  of  Connybearey  and  Warburton^  and 
Watson  in  defence  of  revelation,  useless  ;  and  who,  notice- 
ing  "  their  elaborate  defences  of  Christianity,  and  apologies 
for  the  Bible,"  adds,  "  did  these  ever  convince  one  infidel, 
or  make  him  a  real  convert  to  gospel  truth  ?  I  trow  not !" 

In  many  things  our  author  admits  Cyprian  to  have  been 
worthy,  and  to  have  merited  all  the  praise  he  receives  ;  but 
in  his  office  he  manifested  the  pride  of  a  too  unhumbled 
heart  (Is  the  heart  of  his  censurer  humbled  r)  ;  his  episcopal 
ideas  appear  too  elevated  ;  he  was  a  visionary  ;  his  asser- 
tion that  there  is  only  one  episcopacy  (Episcopatus  unus 
est,  cujus  e  singulis  in  solidum  pars  tenetur)  "  is  unscrip- 
tural ;"  though  the  martyr  builds  it  on  a  text  by  St.  Paul,^' 
which  obviously  admits  of  no  other  meaning.  No  matter ; 
St.  Cyprian  is  pleading  for  "  the  unity  of  an  outivard churchy 
which,  in  the  eyes  of  a  spiritually  minded  man,  must  be 
contemptible  ;"  and,  therefore,  our  spiritually  minded  his- 
torian thinks  himself  authorized  to  quote  the  tract,  De  uni- 
tate  Ecclesice^  partially  and  unfairly !  Nay,  he  thinks  him- 
self authorized  to  affirm,  that  "  the  strong  lines  of  poper}-, 

'*  Fph.  iv.  4,  5;  6,  g;c. 


36<>  Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History', 

tod  a  visible  head  of  the  Catholic  church,  whose  anathemas' 
Were  to  hurl  into  the  dust  every  opposer  to  prelatical  pride^ 
had  now  begun  to  make  considerable  strides,  and  that  no 
man  hitherto  had  more  contributed  to  this  than  Cyprian !" 
Yet  he  must  know,  if  he  knows  any  thing  of  antiquity,  that 
Cyprian,  in  his  letters  to  Stephen,  bishop  of  Rome,  chas- 
tises the  insolence  of  that  prelate,  and  contends  with  ear- 
nestness and  great  strength  of  reasoning  for  an  absolute 
equality  among  bishops !  To  belie  the  records  of  antiquity, 
is  a  very  singular  proof  of  the  impartiality  of  an  historian  ; 
but  what  could  be  expected  from  the  man  who,  while  he  af- 
firms that,  in  the  age  of  Cyprian,  "  strong  lines  of  popery, 
and  a  visible  head  of  the  church  had  begun  to  make  consi- 
derable strides,"  suspects  that  in  the  very  same  age,  *'  the 
name  of  bishop  and  presbyter  was  still  synonimous !"  and 
confounds  Cyprian  with  certain  bishops  sent  by  him  and  the 
African  synod,  to  converse  with  Stephen  on  heretical  bap- 
tism !  To  be  impartial,  a  man  must  be  accurate  as  well  as 
honest* 

Of  Constantine  the  Great,  our  author  thus  writes :  ''  The 
bounties  he  bestowed ;  the  zeal  he  displayed ;  his  liberal 
patronage  of  episcopal  men  ,*"  (Are  there  any  episcopal  wo- 
men in  the  conventicles  of  Lady  Huntingdon  ?)  "  the  pomp 
he  introduced  into  worship  ;  and  the  power  invested  with 
general  councils,"  (What  kind  of  power  was  this  ?)  "  made 
the  church  appear  great  and  splendid  ;  but  I  discover  not  a 
trace  in  Constantine  of  the  religion  of  the  Son  of  God. 
(You  are  a  discerner  of  spirits  !)  As  an  outward  professor, 
and  for  an  outxvard  churchy  no  man  more  open,  more  zeal- 
ous :  as  a  partaker  of  the  gi*ace  of  God  in  truth,  either  in 
gejiuine  repentance  for  his  crimes,  or  real  nezvtiess  of  life^^ 
(Pray,  what  is  the  distinction  between  these  ?)  "  I  want 
abundantly  better  evidence  than  I  can  see  in  Eusebius,  who, 
like  many  a  courtly  bishops  is  very  cordially  disposed  to 
exalt  on  a  pedestal,  the  king  that  patronizes  and  increases 
their  power,  wealth,  and  dignity !" 


Mevietv  of  Haweis^  Church  History*  ^&l 

To  Eusebius,  the  celebrated  historian,  our  spiritually-^ 
minded  man  allows  no  merit.  "  He  was  a  great  favourite 
^t  court.  No  good  sign  for  a  bishops  under  two  such  mo- 
narchs  as  Constantine  and  Constantius*  Whether  he  thought 
in  all  things  as  Arius,  or  not,  it  is  certain  he  supported  hin% 
and  his  adherents.  He,  with  his  nanxesake  of  Nicomedia, 
were  the  pillars  of  the  Avian  heresy!  Eusebius  is  a  miser- 
able voucher;  and  under  all  the  prejudices  and  credulity 
that  are  so  visibly  marked  in  him,  Jam  cordially  thankful 
for  the  more  credible  testimony  of  heathen  men."  (Why 
not  of  heathen  women  ?)  "  I  fear  he  knew  as  little  of  real 
Christianity  as  his  royal  (iniperial)  disciple  Constantine, 
whom  he  so  egregiously  flatters.  The  more  I  read,, the 
more  I  doubt  the  authenticity  of  his  testimony,  and  dare 
not  receive  his  history  as  oracular  !" 

St.  Ambrose  of  Milan  is  no  greater  a  favourite  of  our  au- 
thor than  Eusebius.  He  was  pious,  but  superstitious ;  and 
^  the  piety  of  superstition  is  awfully  e<^uivocal.  How  high 
jhe  spirit  of  true  godliness  was  in  the  church  of  Milan,  I 
must  learn  from  something  besides  their  church  music  and 
the  Ambrosian  chaunt.  His  discipline  respecting  Theodo- 
sius,  is  a  glaring  i^rooi  oi  prelatical  insolence  over  abject  su- 
perstition, and  all  done  for  the  honour  of  the  church."  (Eu- 
sebius is  censured  for  being  court ly^  and  Ambrose  for  not 
being  courtly !)  *'  The  divinity  of  Ambrose  is  wretched, 
and  often  unscriptural ;  and  his  moral  treatises  insignificant** 
Of  the  doctrines  of  predestination  2iXiAgrace^  he  appears  to 
have  very  false  conceptions  :"  i.  e.  he  was  no  Augustinian, 
©r  what  in  modern  language  is  called  a  Calvinist ! 

Not  one  of  the  fathers  before  Augustin  taught  the  pecu- 
liar doctrines  of  Calvin  ;  and  hence  our  historian  repeat- 
edly says  of  them  «//,  that  "  they  are  but  miserable  guides 
to  evangelical  truth!"  Even  of  the  far-famed  bishop  of 
Hippo  himself,  he  says,  that  there  is  more  deep  reasoning, 
solid  argument,  precision  of  language,  and  scriptural  evi- 
dence^ in  one  page  of  Edwards  on  Free  WiJl,  than  in  a^l 


362  ■  Remew  of  Hazveis^  Church  History. 

the  voluminous  works  of"  Augustin  put  together  ;"  though 
it  is  obvious  to  every  man  acquainted  with  the  subject,  that 
Edwards  reasons  as  a  philosophical  necessarian^  of  the  same 
school  with  Hobbes  and  Priestley,  and  not  as  a  predesti- 
narian  of  the  school  of  Calvin  ! 

It  cannot,  however,  excite  great  surprize,  that  Augustin, 
and  the  rest  of  the  fathers,  should  be  considered  as  insuffi- 
cient guides  to  evangelical  truth  by  him  who  considers  St. 
Paul  himself  as  hardly  evangelical.  "  In  compliance  with 
James's  recommendation,  he  was  fulfilling  a  part  of  the 
Mosaic  ritual,  respecting  vows,  in  order  to  shov/  that  he 
continued  to  observe  the  law.  Whether  he  owed  it  such  a 
compliance,  I  have  ever  doubted  ;  this  and  his  circumcising 
Timothy  have  appeared  to  me  temporising.  But  Paul  pro- 
bably is  right,  and  I  am  wrong."  Yes,  Sir,  we  think  this 
probable  ! 

As  the  testimony  of  the  fathers  is  necessary  to  establish 
the  authenticity  of  the  books  of  scripture,  it  may  possibly 
occur  to  some  of  our  readers,  to  ask  whether  Dr.  Haweis^ 
who  has  poured  upon  them  greater  abuse  than  Gibbon,  be  a 
Christian.  The  question  is  not  unreasonable,  and  deserves 
an  answer,  which  it  is  proper  that  the  author  himself  be 
permitted  to  give. 

"  Having  through  divine  mercy  (says  he)  obtained  grace 
to  be  faithful— in  providence  received  my  education — and 
been  called  to  minister  in  the  Church  of  England,  I  have 
embraced  and  subscribed  her  articles,  ex  animo^  and  have 
continued  to  prefer  an  episcopal  mode  of  government ;  and 
I  am  content  herein  to  abide  with  God^  till  I  can  find  one 
more  purely  apostolic." 

We  are  not  certain  that  we  understand  the  author  where 
he  says  that  he  received  his  education  in  providence.  All 
men  of  every  religion,  and  every  nation,  have  been  educated 
under  the  superintending  providence  of  the  Governor  of 
the  universe ;  and  therefore  on  that  account  Dr.  Haweis 
can  claim  nothing  peculiar  to  himself.    But  if  it  be  his 


Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History.  '  363 

meaning  that  he  received  his  education  in  the  town  of  Pro- 
vidence^ in  Rhode-Island,  we  cannot  be  much  surprized  at 
the  contempt  which  he  professes  for  the  writings  of  the 
fathers,  for  in  North- America  those  writings  are  very  little 
studied.  This  circumstance  may  likewise  account  for  the 
following  strange  language  of  "  the  faithful  man  who  is 
content  to  abide  with  God  in  a  church  under  episcopal  go- 
vernment." 

*'  When  I  speak  of  episcopacy,  as  most  correspondent  in 
my  poor  ideas,  to  the  apostolic  practice,  and  the  general 
usage  of  the  church  in  the  first,  and  generally  esteemed 
purer  ages,  let  no  man  imagine  I  plead  for  that  episcopacy, 
which,  rising  on  the  stilts  of  prelatical  pride^  and  worldly- 
mindedness,  has  since  overspread  the  earth  with  its  bane- 
ful  shadow ;  or  suppose  those  to  be  the  true  successors  of 
the  apostles,  who,  grasping  nt  power  and  pre-eminence  over 
churches,  which  their  labours  never  planted  nor  watered, 
claim  dominion  over  districts,  provinces,  kingdoms  beyond 
all  power  of  individual  superintendance.  These  ally  every 
where,  and  in  every  age,  have  manifested  the  same  spirit 
of  antichrist ;  and  that  just  in  proportion  as  their  usurpa- 
tion of  authority  over  the  churches,  and  the  consciences  of 
men,  hath  been  most  extensive,  most  exclusive,  and  most 
intolerant." 

That  the  church  of  England  is  intolerant  will  not  surely 
"fee  supposed,  since  she  permits  one  of  her  sons  to  publish 
such  libels  as  this ;  but  that  her  bishops  claim  dominion  over 
districts,  and  her  archbishops  pre-eminence  over  provinees^ 
are  facts  which  cannot  be  controverted.  In  the  opinion  of 
Dr.  Haweis,  therefore,  she  manifests  the  spirit  of  antichrist ; 
and  it  is  not  wonderful  that  "  a  man  who  has  obtained  grace 
to  be  faithful,  should  consider  it  as  condescension  to  abide, 
in  such  a  society,  even  with  God  !" 

But  still  it  may  be  asked,  upon  whose  testimony  our  au- 
thor builds  this  impartial  history,  after  thus  rejecting  in  a 
lump  the  testimony  of  the  early  writers  of  the  Catholic 


364  Reoiew  of  Baweis^  Church  History* 

church?  Why,  to  the  testimony  oi  heathen  men^  for  which 
we  have  seen  him  so  piously  grateful,  he  adds  that  of  schis^' 
matics^  heretics^  and  apostates  /  Though  Ignatius,  as  a  wri«' 
ter,  appears  to  him, "  low  in  the  scale  of  excellence,  because 
he  advances  many  degrees  above  Clemens  in  episcopal  au- 
thor itif  /"  though  Cyprian  is  a  blasphemer,  because  "  hig 
episcopal  ideas  appear  too  elevated,  and  he  says  that  there 
ought  to  be  but  one  bishop  in  a  Catholic  church  ;*  and 
though  Eusebius  is  accused  of  "  partiality,  credulity,  and 
unfair  representations,"  yet  the  Novetians,  Donatists,  Me- 
letians^  and  Lucifer lans,  are  entitled  to  the  fullest  credit  | 
whilst  Julian  the  apostate  is  styled  almost "  as  good  a  Chris- 
tian as  bishop  Warburton,  and  a  much  better  man."f 

The  Catholic  writers  consider  the  ordination  of  the 
clerg\^  as  a  matter  of  much  importance,  in  which  indeed 
they  are  joined  by  the  Novetians,  Donatists,  Luciferians^ 
and  all  the  sectaries  of  those  early  periods ;  but  they  con- 
tend  likewise  for  the  unity  of  the  church,  not  only  in  doc- 
trine, but  also  in  government  and  discipline  ;  and  this  oul^ 
impartial  historian  condemns  as  ah  intolerable  error.  He 
seems  indeed  to  look  upon  ordination  as  far  from  essential,, 
"  though  he  admits  it  to  be  a  harmless  ceremony  when  not 
employed  to  exalt  the  dignity  of  the  prelatical  tribe ;  but 
*'  the  preservation  of  the  unity  of  an  outward  church,  in 
the  eyes  of  a  spiritually-minded  man,  must  be  contemptible^ 
compared  with  the  holding  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond 
of  peace,  and  loving  one  another  out  of  a  pure  heart  fer- 
vently ;*'    Nay,    '*  the  unhappy  idea  of  the  unity  of  the 

*  Our  author  chooses  to  quote  him  (p.  244)  as  saying  that  there  ought 
to  be  but  one  bishop  in  the  Catholic  church ;  but  the  quotation  is  false. 

•)•  We  are  far  from  approving  of  all  the  paradoxes  advanced  in  tie  di- 
i-ifW  legation  of  Moses ;  but  we  believe  that  Dr.  Haweis  is  the  only  author 
calling  himself  a  Christian,  who  has  censured  either  the  object  or  the  exe- 
cution of  the  "  discourse  concerning  the  earthquake  and  fiery  eruption 
which  defeated  Julian's  attempt  to  rebuild  the  temple  of  Jerusalem."  He 
prefers,  however,  Basnage's  account  of  the  matter,  because  Basnage  waB 
a  Walloon  pastor,  and  Warburton  an  English  bishop. 


Reotero)  of  T^aweis*  Church  History.  36J 

church  under  a  particular  mode  ofgovernment^  produced  the 
plenteous  tares  of  controversy,  and  the  abhorred  mutual 
excommunications  of  men,  whose  duty  it  was  to  love  one 
atiother  out  of  a  pure  heart  fervently ;"  and  it  seems  to  be 
because  the  Novetians  and  Donatists  rent  the  church,  that 
they  are  such  favourites  of  this  worthy  priest  of  the  church 
of  England ! 

Though  he  admits  that  in  "  the  dispute  about  the  lapsed, 
Cyprian's  plan  is  more  scriptural  than  Novetian's,"  he  yet 
says  expressly — "  When  I  hear  Cyprian  anathematizing 
such  a  man,  I  would  rather  be  under  the  curses  with  No- 
vetian,  than  utter  them  with  Cyprian*  I  forbear  to  quote 
the  high  expressions,  to  me  bordering  on  impiety,*  with- 
which  he  honours  the  episcopal  order,  and  from  whence  he 
deriv^es  the  claims  of  obedience.  This  seems  the  great  blot 
in  his  escutcheon,  and  the  cause  of  all  the  indefensible  se- 
verity with  which  he  treated  those  who  presumed  to  differ 
from  him." 

It  is  not  merely  from  the  pleasure  which  our  author  takes 
in  reprobating  a  learned  clergy,  and  in  reviling  the  fathers 
of  the  church,  that  he  expresses  himself  in  this  manner  :  it 
is  to  serve  a  purpose  still  nearer  his  heart.  Mr.  Milner 
having,  in  his  church  history,  compared  the  sectaries  of  the 
present  day  to  the  disorderly  Corinthians  in  the  days  of 
the  apostles,  Dr.  Haweis  says — "  I  am  astonished,  that  a 
man  of  his  Christian  knowledge  and  experience  can  see  any 
similitude  between  a  multitude  of  gracious  souls  withdraw- 
ing from  false  teachers^  and  pastors  who  walk  disorderly, 
working  not  at  all,  and  forming  real  churches  under  faith- 
ful labourers  of  their  ow7i  choice^  and  proud  and  wicked 
Corinthians !  Do  men  withdraw  from  godly  pastors  P    For 

•  To  forbear  quoting  the  expressions  on  which  a  charge  of  impiety  is 
founded  against  a  Christian  bishop,  who  laid  down  his  life  for  the  truth, 
was  extremely  unjust ;  but  it  was  certainly  prudent,  because  there  is  not 
in  the  whole  writings  of  Cyprian  a  single  expression  which  will  admit  of 
an  impious  coustruction. 


366  Review  of  Hcvweis*  Church  Historyl 

one  of  their  description  in  the  present  day,  who  can  be 
blamed  for  so  doing ;  ten  thousand  withdraw  from  their 
parochial  or  heretical  teachers,  on  the  surest  grounds  of 
Christian  oWigation.  The  crime  and  the  schism  is  [are] 
with  those  who  cause  it  [them]  by  their  unscriptural  teach- 
ing and  conduct,  not  with  those  who  come  out  from  among 
them,  and  separate !" 

Such  is  the  substance  of  the  first  volume  of  this  impartial 
history,  comprehending  the  first  four  centuries  of  the  Chris^ 
tian  church.  Of  the  author's  "  inquiries  after  God's  secret 
ones,  the  remnant  whom  the  world  knoweth  not,  the  chosen, 
and  called,  and  faithful,"  we  have  taken  no  notice ;  because 
such  inquiries,  by  whomsoever  made,  must,  of  necessity, 
prove  fruitless. 

Though  that  part  of  the  volume,  of  which  men  can  judge, 
appears  to  us  one  tissue  of  errors  flowing  from  the  com- 
bined sources  of  prejudice,  pride,  and  ignorance  ;  we  shall 
yet  attempt  no  formal  confutation  of  it,  because  what  is  not 
supported  by  argument,  cannot  by  argument  be  overturned. 
Our  author  rests  his  cause  on  "  his  own  poor  opinion,"  as 
he  very  properly  calls  it ;  and  we  trust  that  our  opinion, 
though  poor  likewise,  is  yet  sufficient  to  balance  his.  We 
beg  leave,  however,  to  conclude  this  article  with  a  few  ob- 
servations on  ordination^  the  character  of  St,  Cyprian^  the 
veracity  of  Eusebius^  and  the  utility  of  the  writings  of  the 
Fathers  in  general ;  because  we  think  it  of  great  importance 
to  the  peace  of  the  church,  that  the  people  at  large,  but  more 
especially  the  younger  clergy,  be  on  these  subjects  furnished 
with  correct  notions,  which  they  certainly  will  not  receive 
from  the  volume  under  review. 

Among  the  errors  established  by  the  Council  of  Trent, 
our  reformers  considered  the  Romish  doctrine  concerning 
the  Christian  sacrament.  A  sacrament  was,  by  that  council, 
declared  to  be  "  an  outward  sensible  action,  or  sacred  sign, 
ordained  by  Jesus  Christy  as  a  sure  and  certain  means  to 
bring  grace  to  our  souls.    To  make  a  true  sacrament,  three 


Heview  of  Haxveis*  Church  History,  a67 

things  were  decreed  to  be  requisite  :  1.  That  there  be  some 
GUtrvard  sensible  action  performed ;  2.  That  this  be  a  certain 
means  to  bring  grace  to  the  soul;  and,  3.  That  Jesus  Christ 
be  the  author  of  it.  The  outward  action  was  likewise  said 
to  consist  in  something  spoken  and  sometliing  done ;  the 
thing  done  being  called  the  matter  of  the  sacrament,  and  the 
words  spoken,  xh^form  of  it."^ 

These  definitions  were  adopted  by  the  generality  of  pro- 
testant  churches ;  but  the  English  reformers  holding  it  essen- 
tial to  a  sacrament,  that  the  outward  sensible  action  or  sa- 
cred sign  was  ordained  by  Christ  himselfwhWt  he  sojourned 
on  earth,  rejected,  of  course,  five  of  the  seven  sacraments 
of  the  church  of  Rome ;  because  it  is  obvious  to  every  reader 
of  the  gospels,  that  baptism  and  the  LorcTs  supper  are  the 
only  sacraments,  of  which  the  sacred  sign,  including  what 
is  here  called  the  matter  and  the  form^  was  instituted  by 
Christ  in  person.  Whether  it  would  not  have  been  better, 
with  the  Greek  Church,  to  denominate  baptism  and  the 
Lord's  supper  the  mysteries  of  Christy  which  seems  to  be 
scripture  language,  and  to  have  allowed  the  name  of  sacra' 
ments  to  be  extended  to  other  Christian  institutions,  which 
certainly  involve  in  them  the  obligation  of  an  oath,  we  shaU 
not  now  inquire.  It  is  sufficient  to  observe,  that  the  refor- 
mers of  our  church  unquestionably  considered  the  ordina- 
tion of  ministers,  and  the  right  of  confirmation,  as  institu- 
tions of  Christ,  though  the  sensible  action  or  sacred  sign 
employed  in  each  was  not  instituted  till  after  his  ascent  into 
heaven. 

The  consequence  is,  that  these  rites  have,  by  every  true 
son  of  the  Church  of  England,  been  at  all  times  considered 
as  of  the  highest  importance,  as  ordinances  indeed  of  Christ 

*  We  have  transcribed  this  account  of  the  Romish  doctrine  concerning 
the  sacraments,  from  the  work  of  a  Romish  bishop,  in  two  small  octavo 
volumes,  entitled,  "  The  sincere  Christian  instructed  in  the  Faith,  from 
the  written  Word ;"  but  we  have  compared  it  with  Father  Paul's  history 
ef  the  Council  of  Trenr,  and  found  the  account  cow ct. 


368  Review  of  ITaweis*  Church  History ^ 

through  the  medium  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  as  laying  men 
under  the  most  sacred  obligations.  Some  of  the  clergy,  who, 
during  the  persecution  under  Queen  Mary,  had  fled  to  Ge- 
neva  and  other  protestant  countries  beyond  sea,  returned,  it 
is  true,  with  doubts  in  their  minds,  whether  bishops  and 
presbyters  were  not  originally  of  the  same  order,  and  whe- 
ther presbyterian  ordination  and  confirmation  be  not  of 
equal  validity  with  ordination  and  confirmation  by  bishops. 
From  aflfected  moderation  or  culpable  negligence  of  inquiry, 
the  same  doubts  are  professed  by  two  many  of  the  clergy  at 
this  day ;  but,  except  among  the  independents  who  sprung 
up  under  the  usurpation  of  Cromwell,  it  never  entered  into 
the  head  of  any  man  calling  himself  a  Christian,  to  suppose 
that  the  ordination  of  the  clerg,/  is  a  useless  ceremony,  till 
it  became  fashionable  to  confound  the  religion  of  Christ 
with  what  philosophers  call  the  religion  of  nature. 
,  Were  Christianity  nothing  but  a  system  of  ethics  founded 
on  the  relation  which  subsists  between  God  as  the  Creator 
and  Governor  of  the  world,  and  man,  as  a  rational  crea- 
ture, it  would  indeed  be  ridiculous  to  inquire  by  what  form 
or  what  authority  the  clergy  are  ordained ;  because,  in  that 
"  case,  the  ablest  moralist,  whether  ordained  or  not,  would, 
of  course,  be  the  ablest  and  most  useful  minister.  But  if 
Christianity  be,  as  it  certainly  is,  an  instituted  religion^ 
founded  on  the  means  employed  by  God  to  restore  to  man- 
kind that  immortality  which  all  had  forfeited  by  the  sin  of 
Adam  ;  and  if  immortality  be  not  now,  nor  ever  was  the 
right  of  man,  either  as  inherent  in  his  nature^  or  as  the  re^ 
ward  of  moral  virtue^  (and  this  is  the  dictate  of  sober  phi= 
losophy  as  well  as  of  the  gospel)  it  follows  that  immortality, 
if  conferred  upon  man,  must  be  conferred  as  a  '''free  gift*^ 
upon  such  conditions  as  seemed  best  to  the  all-wise  Given 
But  the  rites  of  a  religion  founded  on  a  free  gift  must  de- 
rive all  the  value,  and  the  ministers  of  that  religion  all  their 
authority,  not  from  the  relations  of  nature^  but  f*-^  ^*  ..iie 
positive  appointment  of  the  author  ofthe^iji^i  and  l>e  whq 


JReview  of  Haweis*  Church  History »  369 

maintains  that  any  man,  who  is  qualified  by  knowledge, 
5iay  act  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  though  he  be  not  or- 
diained,  must,  to  be  consistent,  claim  to  himself  immor- 
tality, not  as  "  the  gift  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord,"  but  either  as  the  inherent  right  of  his  nature,  of 
which  he  cannot  be  deprived,  or  as  a  debt  due  by  God  to  hi^ 
merit. 

Such  arrogant  claims  are  in  direct  opposition  as  well  to 
the  letter  as  to  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel ;  and,  therefore,  he 
who  has  read  the  New  Testament  with  any  degree  of 
intelligence,  and  believes  it  to  be  a  revelation  from  heaven, 
must  be  convinced  that  from  it  only  he  can  learn  who  they 
Sffe  who  have  authority  from  Christ  to  preach  the  word, 
and  to  administer  the  ordinances  of  his  religion*  Into  this 
question  we  enter  not  now,  having  discussed  it  at  some 
length  in  our  ninth  volume,  and  in  our  notes  on  Mr.  Keith's 
letter  published  in  our  twelfth  volume  ;  and  if  our  reason- 
ings on  these  occasions  be  conclusive,  it  is  obvious  that 
something  more  than  agreement  in  faith  is  necessary  to  con- 
stitute that  union  which  our  blessed  Lord  requires  among 
his  disciples, 

.  It  may  not,  however,  be  altogether  useless  to  offer  some- 
'  thing  in  vindication  of  the  mode,  or,  to  use  the  language  of 
the  Council  of  Trent,  "  the  sensible  action  or  sacred  sign," 
by  which  holy  orders  are  conferred  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. This,  it  is  well  known,  is  the  imposition  of  the  hands 
of  the  bishop,  accompanied  with  the  words  which  the 
reader  will  find  in  the  offices  for  the  Ordination  of  Deacons 
and  Priests^  and  the  Consecration  of  Bishops*  That  impo- 
sition of  hands  was  not  the  sensible  action  by  which  our  Sa- 
viour conferred  the  last  and  highest  order  on  the  eleven, 
investing  them  with  the  authority  which  is  now  callecj 
episcopal,  is,  indeed,  certain  ;  because  St.  John  assures  us, 
that  "  he  breathed  on  them,  saying.  Receive  ye  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  &c.  This  sacred  sign  was  properly  employed  by 
him,  "  to  whoin  God  gave  not  the  spirit  by  measure,"  and 

4^7 


270  Review  of  Haweis'  Church  History. 

who  himself  conferred  the  spirit  by  his  own  authority ;  but 
it  would  ill  become  any  mere  man,  who,  whatever  station 
he  may  fill  in  the  church,  can  communicate  the  graces  of  the 
spirit  only  ministerially. 

The  apostles,  therefore,  instead  of  imitating  in  this  in- 
stance the  example  of  their  divine  Master,  adopted  the  sign 
which,  from  time  immemorial,  had  been  employed  among 
their  countrymen  in  the  ordination  of  men  to  offices  sacred, 
or  of  high  importance,  and  which  Christ  himself  had  em- 
ployed on  other  occasions.  Thus,  Moses,  by  the  direction 
of  God,  ordained  Joshua  to  be  his  successor,  by  laying  his 
hands  upon  him,  and  giving  him  a  charge  in  the  sight  of  the 
high  priest  and  all  the  congregation.*  After  his  example, 
the  Jews  employed  the  same  ceremony  in  the  ordination  of 
their  judges  and  rabbins  down  at  least  to  the  year  of  our 
Lord  1170;t  and  it  appears  from  the  Talmud,}  that  in 
the  ordination  of  elders,  three  elders  laid  their  hands  on  the 
head  of  the  candidate  for  that  dignity. 

The  ceremony  of  imposition  of  hands,  therefore,  in  the 
ordination  of  ministers,  was  transplanted  from  the  Jewish 
into  the  Christian  church.  It  was  employed  by  the  college 
of  apostles  in  the  ordination  of  the  seven  deacons  ;  by  the 
prophets  and  teachers  at  Antioch,  in  "  the  separation  of 
Barnabas  and  Saul,  for  the  work  whereunto  the  Holy 
Ghost  had  called  them  ;§  by  St.  Paul  and  Barnabas,  when 
they  ordained  (x^i^orovncravlig^  elders  in  every  church  j||  and 
by  St.  Paul  when  he  ordained  Timothy.  That  imposition 
of  hands  was  meant  to  be  employed  for  the  same  purpose  in 
the  church  of  Christ,  always  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world, 
IS  apparent  from  the  injunction  given  by  the  same  aposUe 
to  the  same  Timothy,  to  "  lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man, 
lest  he  should  be  partaker  of  other  men's  sins  ;"*  and  as  the 

•  Numbers  xxvii.  18,  Sec  f  Vide  Benjamin,  itiner.  p  73. 
I  Sanhedr.  cap.  i.           §  AciS  xiii.  1 — 4.  ||  Acts  xiv.  23. 

*  This  mode  of  a])point)iig  men  to  important  offices  has  not  been  pecu- 
liar to  the  Jewish  and  Christian  character.     We  learn  from  Demosthenes 


Mevino  of  HaweW  Church  History,  371 

Apostles  were  unquestionably  directed  by  the  spirit  of 
Christ,  this  sensible  action  or  sacred  sign  may  be  considered 
as  ordained  by  Christ  himself,  though  not  ordained  by  him 
in  person. 

On  the  subject  of  ordination,  the  Catholic  writers  of  the 
primitive  church  all  thought  as  we  do  ;  and  as  St,  Cyprian 
treats  of  it  more  fully  than  most  of  them,  he  is  peculiarly 
obnoxious  to  the  modern  advocates  for  lay-preaching.  He 
knew  nothing  of  that  Christian  obligation  on  the  grounds  of 
which  the  people  withdrew  themselves,  and,  according  to 
our  author,  are  bound  to  withdraw  themselves  from  their 
parochial  teachers,  and  form  separate  churches  under  la- 
bourers of  their  own  choice.  On  the  contrary,  he  attributed 
all  the  heresies  which  then  infested  the  church  to  such  cause- 
less divisions  ;  and  embraced  every  opportunity  of  exhort- 
ing the  presbyters  and  deacons,  as  well  as  the  people,  to 
obey  their  respective  bishops ;  while  he  entreated  the  bi- 
shops to  preserve  unity  among  themselves.  His  tract,  De 
imitate  Ecclesice  is  one  of  the  most  valuable  works  of  anti- 
quity, breathing  throughout  a  spirit  of  peace  and  love,  and 
written  with  great  perspicuity  of  language  and  force  of 
argument.  Yet  our  author  accuses  him  of  prelatical pride, 
because  he  concurred  with  Cornelius  in  excommunicating 
Novetian  as  an  incorrigible  schismatic. 

"  That  Novetian  was  a  dissenter  from  the  church  I  cannot 
perceive  ;  for  he  was  a  bishop  as  truly  chosen  and  ordained, 
from  any  thing  which  appears,  as  Cornelius,  He  was  a  man 
avowedly  sound  in  all  the  principles  of  the  gospel  doctrine, 
and  concurring  in  all  the  discipline  of  the  church  ;  nay,  dis- 
posed to  carry  it  to  excess  ;  and  besides  this,  there  rests  not 
a  shadow  of  accusation  against  him." 

With  your  leave,  good  Doctor,  this  shadow  was  suffici- 

(Oratione  1.  in  Phiiip.)  that  there  were  magistrates  among  the  Athenians 
constituted  x^^iolovia,,  and  thence  styled  ;)^E4^(37ov>9']a4  ;  and  the  same  thing 
appears  from  the  writings  both  of  Plutarch  and  Cicero. 


QT2  Review  of  Haweis'  Church  History* 

ent  to  condemn  him.    The  manner  in  which  he  prevailed 

upon  three  obscure  bishops  to  consecrate  him  is  well  known ; 

and  there  is  not  perhaps  in  the  annals  of  the  church  anochet 

consecration  so  completely  scandalous.     But  granting,  for 

the  sake  of  argument,  that  it  had  been  otherwise,  the  Ro* 

man  see  was  already  filled  by  Cornelius,  whom  you  acknow^ 

ledge  to  have  been  sound  in  the  faith,  and  unexceptionable 

in  his  administration  of  the  discipline  of  the  church.     In 

that  state  of  things,  could  Novetian  claim  to  be  bishop 

of  Rome,  and  refuse  to  hold  communion  with  Cornelius 

and  his  clergy,  without  becoming  a  schismatic^  or,  as  you 

properly  enough  express  it,  a  dissenter  from  the  church  ? 

Were  you  to  go  over  to  America,  get  yourself  consecrated 

by  three  bishops  of  the  church  of  the  United  States,  return 

to  Canterbury,  and  claim  to  be  rightful  metropolitan  of  all 

England,  refusing  to  communicate  with  any  clergyman  who 

preaches  not  the  doctrines  of  unconditional  election  and 

reprobation,  would  you  or  would  you  not  be  a  schismatic 

or  dissenter  from  the  church  of  England  I 

To  this  question  it  is  possible  that  you  and  we  may  be 
disposed  to  give  different  answers ;  but  were  a  clergyman, 
calling  himself  the  Rector  of  All  Saints,  Aldwinckle,*  to 
©pen  a  conventicle  in  the  parish,  and  seduce  the  people 
from  the  church,  under  pretence  that  j^ou  had  climbed  over 
the  wall  of  the  sheepfold,  by  accepting  of  an  unscriptural 
presentation ;  and  were  he  to  refuse  holding  any  communion 
with  you,  calling  you  liar  and  traitor  on  account  of  the 
tendency  of  this  impartial  history,  we  are  persuaded  that 
you  would  agree  with  us  in  deeming  such  a  man  a  schisma^ 
tky  who  deserved  to  be  degraded  and  eKcommunicated  by 
the  bishop  of  the  diocese.  Yet  his  crime  would  be  less  than 
that  of  Novetian  in  the  same  proportion  as  a  modern  parish 
is  less  than  the  ancient  diocese  of  Rome,  and  as  the  bar* 
mony  of  a  single  congregation  is  of  less  consequence  than 

*  Dr.  Haweis  is  Rector  of  All  Saints,  Aldwincklo. 


Itevi^  of  Haweis*  Church  History •  373 

the  peace  of  the  church  universal.  But  it  is  for  passing  the 
usual  censures  on  Novetian  and  his  adherents  that  Cyprian 
lis  here  charged  with  prelatical  pride  and  insolence^  though 
it  will  not  be  easy  to  find  in  all  the  records  of  the  church 
more  striking  instances  of  humility,  combined  with  dignity, 
than  was  displayed  by  the  bishop  of  Carthage  on  this  and 
various  other  occasions. 

To  his  deacon  Pontius,  who  lived  in  his  house,  accom» 
panied  him  in  his  exile,  and  was  present  at  his  martyrdom, 
his  character  was  surely  better  known  than  to  Dr.  Haweis, 
who,  from  circumstances  to  be  noticed  hereafter,  appears 
to  us  never  to  have  read  a  page  of  his  original  works.  Had 
Cyprian  been  an*ogant  and  insolent,  such  a  domestic  must 
sometimes  have  felt  his  insolence.  Yet,  speaking  of  the 
reluctance  with  which  he  yielded  to  the  clergy  and  people 
demanding  him  for  their  bishop,  Pontius  goes  on— Quidam 
Hli  restiterunt,  etiam  ut  vinceret.  Quibus  tamen  quanta 
lenitate,  quam  patienter,  quam  benevolenter  indulsit  quam 
clementer  ignovit,  amicissimos  eos  postmodum  et  inter  ne- 
nessarios  computans  mirantibus  multis  ?  Cui  enim  posset 
non  esse  miraculo,  tarn  memoriosae  mentis  oblivio  ? 

Could  this  have  been  published  in  Carthage  of  a  bishop 
of  an  icnhumbled  lieart^  at  a  time  when  thousands  were  alive 
to  contradict  the  eulogium  ?  Or,  would  the  same  deacon 
have  said  of  an  insolent  bishop,  whose  death  he  had  just  re- 
corded— Dolebo  quod  non  comes  fuerim  ?  sed  illius  victoria 
triumphanda  est.  Devictoria  triumphabo  ?  sed  doleo  quod 
comes  non  sim.  Verum  vobis  tamen  et  simpliciter  confi- 
tendum  est  quod  et  vos  scitis,  in  hac  me  fuisse  sententia. 
Multum,  ac  nimis  multum  de  gloria  ejus  exulto;  plus 
tamen  doleo  quod  remensi. 

Our  author  calumniates  Eusebius  still  more  grossly  than 
he  had  calumniated  Cyprian.  He  admits,  indeed,  that "  this 
famed  prelate,  remarkable  for  his  knowledge,  readmg,  and 
ecclesiastical  investigations,  stands  eminent  among  the  first 
authorities  for  church  history  j"  yet,  as  we  have  seen,  as  a 


$74  Rfoiew  of  HmJOeifP  Church  Histdry* 

divine  he  was  an  hceresiarch^  and  as  an  historian,  credulous 
and  unfaithful! 

:  That  Eusebius,  who  was  a  great  admirer  of  Origen,  and 
deeply  skilled  in  the  Platonic  philosophy  of  the  Alexandrian 
school,  sometimes  expresses  himself  un cautiously  on  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  must  indeed  be  granted  ;  but  it  is  impos- 
sible to  consider  as  a  pillar  of  the  Arian  heresy,  the  man, 

who  calls  Christ  aulo^sov  Ijery  God^  and  rov  ity.yJ^oua-ikKX.  xai  7rav»)y 

juova,  TiOLi  a,vlov  Geov-^sovereig"?!  and  leader  of  all  thing's^  and  God 
by  himself^  Dr.  Haweis,  however,  from  his  reply  to  Dr. 
Maclane's  vindication  of  Eusebius,  seems  to  consider  even 
bishop  Bull  himself  a  pillar  of  Arianism  ;  for  that  illustri- 
ous prelate,  in  his  Defensio  fidei  Nicenae,  has  a  whole  chap- 
ter de  subordinatione  filii. 

But  granting  that  Eusebius  was  a  semi- Arian,  which  the 
expressions  quoted  above  will  not  permit  us  to  grant,  he 
may,  notwithstanding,  be  a  faithful  historian.  His  morals 
were  never  impeached ;  pietate  adeo  venerabilis  (says 
Cave,t)  ut  apud  plurimas  occidentis  ecclesias  in  sanctorum 
numero  habebatur  j  and  he  was  so  little  ambitious  of  worldly 
greatness,  that  he  refused  to  exchange  the  comparatively 
poor  see  of  Caesarea  for  the  rich  one  of  Antioch,  because 
he  deemed  the  translation  of  bishops  from  see  to  see  disre- 
putable. What  could  tempt  such  a  man  to  falsify  the  re- 
cords of  the  church  ?  He  was  no  schismatic,  nor  patron  of 
schismatics,  that  he  should  have  written  a  history  for  the 
express  purpose  of  proving  that  the  church  of  the  fourth 
century  had  deviated  esseatially  from  the  original  church  of 
Christ  in  doctrine,  in  government,  and  in  worship !  Had 
Dr.  Clarke,  whom  our  author  calls  a  blasphemer,  written  a 
history  of  the  church  of  England,  does  any  man  in  his  sen- 
ses couclude,  that  because  he  was  an  Arian,  or  semi-Arian, 
he  would  have  given  a  false  detail  of  the  succession  of  the 
Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York  ?  Yet,  for  no  other 

*  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  x.  cap,  4.  f  Hist.  Liter. 


Review  of  Haweis*  Church  Histonj»  ZfS 

reason  than  the  supposed  arianism  of  Eusebius,  does  our^'f^- 
dicious  and  impartial  historian  question  the  authenticity  of 
the  Hst  which  he  gives  of  the  bishops  of  Jerusalem,  and  ac- 
cuse the  learned  author  of  glaring  prejudice  and  credulity ! 

But  does  not  Eusebius  publish  letters  which  were  said  to 
have  passed  between  our  blessed  Lord  and  Abgarus,  king 
of  Edessa  ?  and  are  not  those  letters  apocryphal,  though  he 
professes  to  have  translated  them  from  the  Syriac  originals 
preserved  in  the  archives  of  Edessa  ?  That  Eusebius  has 
published  such  letters  is  certain ;  and  to  us  it  appears 
equally  certain,  that  the  letters  are  forgeries;  but  we  do  not 
think  that  Eusebius  was  the  forger,  or  that  it  is  any  proof 
of  his  extreme  credulity,  that  what  imposed  upon  Baronius^ 
Spondanus^  Valesiiis  and  Vossius^  among  the  modems,  and 
to  which  even  Cassaubon  and  Cave  seem  inclined  to  give 
credit,  imposed  upon  him.  The  Syriac  originals  were 
doubtless  given  to  him  as  authentic ;  and  he  inserted  trans- 
lations of  them  in  his  history  of  the  church,  just  as  Livy 
inserted  some  incredible  tales  in  his  history  of  Rome.  He 
inserted  them  as  letters  preserved  in  the  archives  of  Edessa^ 
which,  with  other  archives,  had  been  laid  open  to  him  by 
the  command  of  the  Emperor  Constantine  ;  and  as  he  had 
si  character  to  lose,  and  was  obnoxious  to  a  large  party  in 
the  church,  it  is  not  conceivable  that  he  would  have  appealed 
to  public  archives  as  containing  letters  which  he  was  con- 
scious that  he  himself  had  forged.  All  that  Eusebius  at- 
tested as  consisting  with  his  own  knowledge  was  undoubt- 
edly true ;  and  we  beg  our  learned  author,  before  he  makes 
another  attack  on  his  character  as  an  historian,  to  read  with 
as  much  attention  as  he  is  able  to  bestow,  the  eighth  chapter 
of  the  first  part  of  Bishop  Pearson's  Vindicice  Ignatiance, 
In  the  mean  time  he  may  meditate  on  the  following  extract 
from  that  masterly  performance,  and  prove  himself,  if  he 
can,  an  abler  judge  of  such  matters  than  the  author! 

Si  autorem  uUum  veterem  nominare  posset,  quam  Euse- 
bius agnovit,  et  cujus  autoritatem  testimoniis  aliorum  con- 


5^6  Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History, 

firmatum  ivet,  qui  postea  fictor  detectus  est,  aut  val  in  du- 
bium  vocatus:  aliquid  quidam  diceret,  quod  eum  a  tetJieri-' 
tatis  et  inverecundice  crimine^  ut  ipse  loquitur,  liber areU 
Ego  vero  Eusebium  tanta  diligentia  tantoque  judicio  in 
examinandis  Christianorum  primaevae  antiquitatis  scriptis, 
in  quibus  traditionem  apostolicam  contineri  arbitratus  est, 
usum  fuisse  contend©,  ut  nemo  unquam  de  ejus  fide  aut 
descriptis,  quae  ille  pro  indubitatis  habuit,  postea  dubitaverit. 
Libri  qui  nunc  in  dubium  vocantur,  aut  olim  vocati  sunt, 
testimonium  ejus  non  habent. 

Of  Dr.  Haweis's  diligence  and  judgment  in  examining 
the  writings  of  Christian  antiquity,  some  estimate  may  be 
formed  from  his  calling  Abgarus  Agbarus ;  from  his  sup- 
posing that  "  most  of  the  Apostles  lived  and  died  2Xi\OTi^ 
their  brethren  in  Palestine  ;"  from  his  affirming  that  "  al! 
ecclesiastical  officers  for  the  first  three  hundred  years  were 
elected  by  the  people — nay,  that  Matthias  was  thus  chosen 
to  fill  up  what  he  calls  the  tribular  number  of  the  Apostles  ;'* 
from  his  affirming  that  "  no  claims  of  pre-eminence  among 
the  clergy  make  their  appearance  in  the  epistle  of  Clement 
to  the  Ciorinthians ;"  and  that  it  "  was  not  till  the  reign  of 
Adrian  that  the  bishop  was  supposed  to  stand  in  the  place 
of  the  Jewish  high-priest,  the  presbyters  in  the  place  of 
priests,  and  the  deacons  in  the  place  of  Levites."^  In  far- 
ther proof  of  his  accuracy  and  diligence,  he  speaks  of  "  the 
Constitutions  of  Ignatius^''  meaning,  we  suppose,  the  apos^ 
tolical  constitutions^  which  were  pretended  to  have  been 
written  by  Clement ;  he  calls  Polycarp,  whom  all  antiquity 
represents  as  the  disciple  of  St,  John^  the  disciple  of  Jgna-^ 
iitcs ;  mistaking  the  name  of  an  office  for  the  name  of  a 
man,  he  calls  Pontius,  the  deacon  of  St.  Cyprian,  Pontius 
Diaconus  ;  and,  as  we  have  seen,  he  makes  Cyprian  him^ 


•  To  be  convinced  of  the  rashness  of  this  assertion,  the  reader  needs 
only  to  consult  St.  Clement's  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  or  vol.  ix, 
•p.  125,  of  our  Reviev/-. 


Review  of  Hawets*  Church  History,  37f 

self  an  advocate  for  popery^  at  the  very  time  that  he  was 
contending  for  the  equal  rights  of  diocesan  episcopacy^  and 
reproving  Stephen^  bishop  of  Rome  ^  for  acting  as  if  he  thought 
himself  superior  to  odier  bishops!  Has  Dr.  Havveis  read 
one  page  of  the  writings  of  Clemens  Romanus,  of  Pontius, 
or  of  Cyprian  ? 

He  has  certamly  laboured  to  prove,  if  confident  assertions 
can  be  called  proof,  that  there  are  none  of  the    Fathers 
whose  writings  are  worth  the  reading  ;   but  mere  asser- 
tions will  have  little  weight  in  a  cause  where  more  learned 
men  had  employed,  without  success,  much  erudition  and 
plausible  reasoning.     The  heaviest  charge  which  has  been 
urged  against  the  Fathers  is  their  credulity;  but  "  upon  an 
impartial  examination  oS.  the   passages,  upon   which  this 
charge  principally  depends  for  support,  it  will  appear,  (says 
a  learned  writer*,)  that  many  of  the  supposed  errors  arise 
from  misrepresentation  ;  that  many  relate  to  trifling  circum- 
stances, many  are  dispersed  among  the  sentiments  of  indi- 
viduals, and  not  among  the  tenets  of  the  church,  and  have 
no  relation  whatsoever  to  public  principles  of  belief,  or  pub- 
lic terms  of  communion.     How,  therefore,  these  peculiar- 
ities conspire  to  make  them  generally  unserviceable  in  the 
cause  of  religion,  it  is  diffijult  to  comprehend.     If  any  at- 
tempts to  elevate  the  Fathers  to  the  high  rank  of  the  apos- 
tles, were  made  by  their  advocates  ;  if  they  were  affirmed 
to  have  been  assisted  by  inspiration  ;t  or  to  have  been  en^ 
dowed  above  the  common  lot  of  mankind,  with  infallibility  ; 
the  objection  would  doubtless  carry  great  force  against  such 
ambitious  pretensions.     But  we  contend  only  that  thev  de- 
serve our  regard  as  xvitnesses  of  the  opinions  of  their  rey.pec- 
live  ages  ;  as  historians  of  the  facts  xvhich  were  accessible  to 

*  Mr.  Keith,  in  his  Sermons  at  Bampton's  Lecture. 

t  Dr.  Haweis  admits  the  apostolical  Fathers  to  have  been  assisted  by 
&lSpira^ion,  for  he  says  expressly,  that  •*  miraculous  gifts  generally  ceased 
with  the  first  generation  of  the  Apostles' converts  and  successors.  There- 
fore Clement  and  Ignatius  were  inspired. 

48 


Sta  Review  of  Haxveis*  Church  History, 

their  inquiries ;  and  as  teachers,  whose  pietv  and  learning 
eminently  distinguished  them  from  all  their  contemporaries. 
Sharing  the  imperfections  of  other  writers,  they  fairly  claim 
the  same  indulgence.  The  faults  imputed  to  them  ought 
frequently  to  be  imputed  to  the  times  in  which  they  lived  j 
when  accuracy  of  research  was  often  precluded  by  nume- 
rous obstacles,  and  when  ardent  zeal  induced  them  to  press 
every  circumstance  into  their  service,  which  carried  with  it 
even  the  appearance  of  truth.  If  the  plea  of  credulity  de- 
serves to  be  admitted  as  a  ground  of  rejection,  widi  equal 
or  perhaps  superior  force  does  it  operate  against  some  of 
the  most  celebrated  authors  of  Greece  and  Rome." 

This  is  placing  the  utility  of  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  in 
a  proper  light.     It  is  as  witnesses  only  that  we  plead  for 
them  ;  and  as  witnesses  they  are  entitled  to  the  fullest  cre- 
dit.   Their  reasonings  are  often  weak,  and  their  criticisms 
puerile  ;  but  it  is  impossible  to  question  the  integrity  of 
men  who  laid  down  their  lives  for  the  truth :  What  they 
affirm   that   they  witnessed,  they  undoubtedly  witnessed. 
Even  the  opinions^  in  which  they  were  unanimous— ^-wo^/ 
semper^  quod  uhique^  quod  ab  omnibus — are  not  to  be  hastily 
rejected,  merely  because  they  tally  not  with  the  dogmas  of 
this  or  that  modern  school ;  and  the  man  must  have  a  very 
high  opinion  of  his  own  understanding,  who,  like  our  au- 
thor, presumes  to  say  that  he  holds  the  gospel  truth  in  greater 
purity  than  the  bishops  and  presbyters  of  the  first  three 
centuries. 

"  Pride,  surely,  was  not  made  for  man ;"  and  men  truly 
religious  are  always  humble.  The  most  virtuous  man  on 
earth  must  be  sensible  that  his  good  deeds  cannot  benefit 
his  Maker ;  and  the  most  zealous  and  orthodox  Christian, 
if  he  forget  not  that  he  possesses  nothing  which  he  did  not 
receive,  will  not  boast  of  the  services  which  he  may  have 
rendered  to  the  cause  of  piety  and  truth.  It  was  not,  there- 
fore, without  surprize,  that  we  found  our  most  orthodox  au- 
thor, in  the  preface  to  the  second  volume  of  this  history, 
expressing  himself  in  the  following  terms  : 


Review  of  Hccweis'  Church  History.  379 

'^  The  great  design  of  the  adorable  Redeemer  when  he 
came  down  from  heaven,  was  to  procure  peace  upon  earth, 
and  good  will  towards  men.  To  correspond  with  this  de- 
sirable and  blessed  purpose,  is  the  great  end  and  object  of 
this  history !" 

A  comparison  such  as  this  we  had  imagined  that  no  man, 
whose  mind  is  not  swollen  with  spiritual  pride,  would  have 
dared  to  make ;  and  we  will  venture  to  say,  that  the  blas- 
phemer Clarke,  though  justly  reprehensible  for  the  notions 
which  he  entertained  of  the  Son  of  God,  never  in  idea  com- 
pared the  designs  of  that  adorable  person  with  his  own  !  He 
left  such  comparisons  to  fanatics,  and  to  a  species  of  mis- 
sionaries, with  which,  in  his  day,  the  Christian  Church  was 
not  acquainted. 

Clarke,  indeed,  as  well  as  more  orthodox  men,  held 
hardly  any  principle  in  common  with  Dr.  Haweis  ;  for  he 
thought  that  our  belief  of  Christianity  rests  on  the  evidence 
of  miracles  and  prophecj^ ;  and  our  impartial  historian 
affirms,  with  a  confidence,  which,  were  the  assertion  true, 
could  become  only  the  searcher  of  hearts,  that  "  no  n^n 
€ver  was  convinced  of  divine  truth  savingly  by  miracle  !" 
What  though  St.  Luke  assures  us  (Acts  ix.  ^5,)  that  "  all 
who  dwelt  at  Lydda,  when  they  saw  Eneas  miraculously 
cured  by  St.  Peter,  turned  to  the  Lord  !"  our  author,  who 
thinks  it  doubtful  whether  St.  Paul  or  himself  had  imbibed 
most  of  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  may  consider  the  testi- 
mony of  St.  Luke  as  originating  in  mistake;  for  the  Apos- 
tle certainly  understood  the  doctrine  of  saving  faith  better 
than  the  Evangelist. 

From  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  Reformation,  our  author  traces,  with  a  bold 
pencil,  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  corruptions  of  Christi- 
anity ;  but  we  shall  content  ourselves,  and,  we  trust,  our 
readers,  with  a  very  cursory  view  of  his  detail  of  the  trans- 
actions of  that  gloomy  period,  because  his  facts  are  authen- 
ticated only  by  his  own  assertions,  and  are  such  as  furnish 


380  I^eviezO  of  HdWeis'  Chtlr&h  llistot't/. 

few  lessons  of  iristniction  to  Christians  of  the  present  day* 
His  account  of  the  Nestorians  and  Eutvchians,  in  the  fifth 
century,  is  well  told  ;  but  his  nan-ative  of  the  rise,  progr*  ss^ 
and  present  prevalence  of  Pelagianism  is  in  many  respects 
objectionable. 

When  he  talks  of  "  Cassian^  a  Monk,  of  Marseilles,  dif- 
fusing abundantly  the  pleasing  poison  of  this  heresy,"  we 
will  not  give  ourselves  the  trouble  to  inquire  whether  he 
may  not  mean  Cassiodorus^  who,  from  being  Minister  to 
Theodoric  the  Ostrogath,  retired^  in  his  old  age,  into  a  mo- 
nastery of  his  own  building  in  Galabria^  and  published  the 
tripartite  history  of  Socrates,  Sozomen^  and  Theodorite, 
with  various  learned  w^orks  of  his  own  and  other  writers. 
Cassiodorus,  we  know,  has  been  accused,  most  unjustly  in- 
deed, of  Pelagianism,  because  he  pubhshed  some  of  the 
works  of  Pelagius,  after  purging  them  of  their  errors  ;  but 
Cassian,  as  Dr.  Cave  observes,  was  "  Pelagianorum  hostis 
acerrimus."  Even  the  view  which  Dr.  Haweis  gives  of  the 
opinions  of  Cassian^  though  not  quite  accurate,  differs  widely 
from  the  heresies  of  Pelagius,  He  was  indeed  styled  by 
the  followers  of  Augustin,  a  ^'^wzi-pelagian,  but  with  what 
justice  the  reader  will  perceive  when  he  is  informed  that 
Cassian  adm.tted  the  doctrine  of  original  sin^  and  the  ne- 
cessity of  preventing  as  well  as  co-operating  grace.  He 
contended,  indeed,  as  St.  Paul  had  done  before  him,  that 
"  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the  spirit,  and  the  spirit  against 
the  flesh  ;  and  that  without  some  such  internal  struggle  as 
this,  there  could  be  no  such  thing  as  human  virtue,  nor  any 
receptacle  in  man  for  divine  grace  ;  but  so  far  from  teach- 
ing, that  virtue  merits  heaven,  as  quoted  by  the  accurate 
author  of  the  Historia  Liter aria^  "  ex  nimio  fere  pelagia- 
nos  oppugnandi  studio  errores,  asserit  omnes  justorum^w^- 
titias  esse  peccanta  /" 

We  readily  admit,  however,  that  in  the  writings  of  Cas- 
sian errors  may  be  found,  and  that  Pelagius  was  a  heretic, 
whom  our  author  has  treated  with  perhaps  greater  lenitv^ 


Review  of  Harweis^  Church  History.  381 

than,  from  the  nature  of  his  heresy,  he  could  have  claimed 
at  his  hands  ;  but  we  protest  against  the  uncharitable  insinu- 
ation, that  Pelagianism  pervades  the  Chiirch  of  England  at 
present ;  and  we  shall  not  hesitate  to  pronounce  Dn  Haweis 
a  false  accuser  of  the  brethren,  if  he  charge  with  Pelagian- 
ism, all  who  dissent  from  the  dogmas  of  Augustin,  Lu- 
ther, Calvin,  and  Edwards.  Of  the  work  of  Edwards  on 
Free-will,  he  perceives  not,  as  we  have  already  observed, 
the  tendencv  ;  and  we  doubt  much  if  he  fully  comprehends 
the  metaphysics  even  of  his  masters  Augustin  and  Calvin. 
The  following  exclamation  is  the  offspring  of  arrogance  and 
ignorance : 

"  I  confess  my  astonishment  at  Mr.  Milner's  assertion, 
that  the  doctrine  of  particular  redemption  was  unknown  to 
the  ancients ;  and  he  wishes  it  had  remained  equallv  un- 
known to  the  moderns  ;  (we  heartily  wish  the  same  thing). 
I  am  shocked  that  the  scriptures  of  truth  should  be  treated 
thus  slightly,  or  the  greatest  and  best  of  men  be  laid  under 
so  unbecoming  a  censure." 

Whether  Mr.  Milner's  assertion  be  censure  or  praise,  it 
is  an  undoubted  truth,  that  in  the  writings  of  the  Fathers, 
anterior  to  St.  Augustin,  there  is  nothing  which  gives  the 
smallest  countenance  to  particular  redemption.  But  pray, 
Sir,  when. did  you  discover  that  the  Fathers  of  the  first  four 
centuries  were  the  greatest  and  best  of  men  ?  In  your  first 
volume  you  represent  them  as  a  crew  of  turbulent,  credu- 
lous, contemptible  liars^  a  $ort  of  character  to  which  we 
would  not  be  hasty  to  apply  either  of  the  epithets  great  and 
good*  With  respect  to  the  scriptures  of  truth,  what  right 
have  you  to  suppose  that  either  yourself,  Calvin,  Luther, 
or  Augustin,  understood  them  better  than  Bishop  Bull  or 
Jeremy  Taylor  ?  We  know  your  answer  to  this  question  ; 
for,  after  representing  the  Church  as  so  totally  coiTupted 
in  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  that  no  genuine  Christianity 
was  to  be  found  in  it  but  among  a  few  unknown  persons, 
Ood^s  secret  ones^  you  thus  express  yourself; 


3S2  Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History* 

"  The  state  of  things  at  that  time  nearly  resembled  the 
present.  The  greater  dignitaries  of  the  Church  too  much 
men  of  this  world;  the  inferior  clergy  UJider  their  infiuence^ 
and  choosing  the  ministry  for  its  advantages,  or  an  idle  life; 
and  the  people^  like  their  priests^  easily  engaged  in  the  page- 
antry of  rites,  ceremonies,  and  superstitions  observances : 
though  a  generation  was  preserved,  who  cleaved  to  the  Lord 
in  one  faith,  and  served  him  out  of  a  pure  heart  fervenriy  :" 
A  very  pretty  character  this  of  the  Church  of  England  and 
all  her  great  dignitaries,  of  whom  we  know  none  greater 
than  the  two  prelates  to  whom  we  have  referred  you. 

The  view  of  the  church  during  the  sixth  century  grows 
darker  and  darker,  and  presents  very  little  that  is  worthy 
of  the  reader's  attention.  To  our  author's  narrative,  how* 
ever,  implicit  credit  must  not  be  given;  for  he  inadver- 
tently acknowledges  (p.  49),  that  he  has  only  "  looked  at 
some  of  the  "writers  of  that  age,  and  their  works."  By 
what  means  he  obtained  a  sight  of  the  writers  of  that  age, 
he  has  not  told  us  ;  but  we  cannot  help  thinking  that  a  man 
ambitious  of  the  character  of  an  impartial  \\\sX.oYidXi^  was  in 
duty  bound,  not  only  to  look  at^  but  to  read  with  care  many 
of  the  works  of  every  age,  of  which  he  proposed  to  record 
the  events  and  doctrines. 

In  the  seventh  century  arose  the  impostor  Mohammed, 
for  whose  success  our  author  well  accounts,  by  allowing  to 
him  great  abilities,  which  he  undoubtedly  possessed,  and 
by  showing  what  advantages  he  derived  from  the  igno- 
rance, corruption,  and  condition  of  the  clergy.  We  doubt, 
however,  if  Dr.  Hawcis  has  done  more  than  look  at  the 
original  waitings  of  that  period.  To  prove  the  extreme  su-  . 
perstition  of  the  age,  he  quotes  St.  Eloi  of  Noyon's  charac- 
ter of  a  good  Christian,  which  he  tnay  have  found  in  Lord 
Kames's  Sketches^  of  the  History  of  Man,  We  do  not  say 
that  he  has  actually  taken  it  fn^m  that  work  ;  but  it  is  some- 
what singular  that  an  English  historian  of  the  Church 
should  have  quoted,  without  addition  or  diminution,  the 


Review  of  Haweis'  Church  History,  383 

very  passage  which  had  before  been  quoted  for  the  same 
purpose  by  the  Scotch  Judge.* 

Our  author,  who,  upon  every  occasion,  betrays  a  fellow- 
feeling  for  schismatics^  is  very  willing  to  find  the  pure  doc- 
trines of  the  gospel  among  the  Pauliniam  of  this  century ; 
though,  by  his  own  account  of  them,  they  had  as  little  claim 
to  the  appellation  of  Christians  as  the  modem  Quakers. — 
"  They  regarded  the  sacraments,  he  says,  as  merely  allego- 
rical, and  not  literally  to  be  observed  ;  they  treated  the  Vir- 
gin Mary  contemptuously'*'*  (which  he  seems  to  consider  as 
meretorious  conduct)  ;  "  and  in  their  church  assemblies 
they  abolished  their  names,  [and  offices]  of  Bishops  and 
Presbyters,  instituting  a  set  of  pastors,  with  perfect  equality ^ 
without  any  peculiar  rights^  privileges^  or  garb  to  distin- 
guish them  from  the  people  !" 

His  account  of  the  struggles  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  for 
universal  supremacy  in  this  age,  and  of  the  opposition 
which  was  made  to  his  claims,  not  only  by  the  Eastern 
Church,  but  by  the  British,  Scotch,  and  Galilean  Churches, 
and  even  by  the  Bishop  of  Ravenna,  in  Italy,  would  be 
valuable,  had  he  referred  us  to  the  authors  from  whom  the 
account  is  taken.  The  man,  however,  who  only  looks  at  ori- 
ginal writings  might  not  have  found  this  an  easy  task  ;  and, 
therefore.  Dr.  Haweis  never  attempts  it. 

His  history  of  the  eighth  century  is  a  well  told  tale  ;  but 
it  can  be  considered  as  nothing  more  ;  for  though  in  gene- 
ral true,  it  rests  on  no  other  authority  than  his  own  asser- 
tions. Not  one  quotation  is  given— not  one  contemporary 
writer  referred  to.  The  means  by  which  the  Pope  obtained 
what  he  has  long  claimed  as  the  patrimony  of  St.  Peter ; 
the  origin  of  the  temporal  dignities  of  the  prelates,  as  Dukes, 
Marquisesy  Counts  and  Barons ;  the  final  rupture  between 
the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches  on  account  of  image 

*  See  Sketches  of  the  History  of  Man,  vol.  iv.  p.  876,  377,  and  our 
author's  Impartial  History ^  vol.  ii.  p.  63,  8tc. 


384  Review  of  Haioeis*  Church  History, 

worship  ;  the  conquests  of  the  Saracens,  and  the  first  for- 
midable appearance  of  the  Turks,  are  all  perspicuoush'  de- 
tailed. We  have  likewise  a  concise  account  of  the  rise  of 
the  new  Empire  of  the  West,  under  Charles  the  son  of  Pe- 
pin, surnamed  (says  our  author)  Charlemagne,  This,  we 
suppose,  was  said  to  show  his  skill  in  the  French  language, 
as  it  is  probably  to  display  his  knowledge  of  Greeks  that  a 
sect,  by  all  other  historians  styled  monothdites,^  is  by  him 
uniformly  called  monotholites. 

In  the  detail  of  ecclesiastical  affairs  during  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, we  expected  some  account  of  the  rise  and  constitution 
of  the  Moravian  Church,  which  has  been,  from  its  founda- 
tion, independent  both  of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  and  of  the 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople  ;  but  we  were  disappointed. 
Our  author  tells  us  only  that  it  was  founded  in  850,  by  two 
Greek  Monks ;  and  that  it  is  sufficiently  superstitious.  He 
dwells,  however,  at  some  length,  on  the  sufferings  of  Go^ 
teschalcus^^  whom  he  calls  a  martyr  for  divine  truth  ;  and 
expresses  himself  in  language  extremely  reprehensible. 

We  abhor,  as  much  as  he  does,  all  kinds  of  religious  per- 
secution; and  the  peculiar  dogmas  of  Goteschalcus — at  least 
those  dogmas  for  which  he  suffered,  appear  to  us  harmless, 
though  certainly  not  essential  articles  of  the  faith  ;  and,  in 
one  sense  of  the  words,  perhaps  not  true.  As  our  author 
mentions  them  only  in  general  terms,  as  "  the  doctrines  of 
predestination  and  grace,"  we  shall  lay  them  before  our 
readers  in  the  words  of  Goteschalcus  himself,  that  a  judge- 
ment may  be  formed  of  the  propriety  of  Dr.  Haweis's 
writings. 

*  From  i^ovo;  and  SsAw. 

t  Goteschalcus,  called  likewise  Fiilgentius,  on  account  of  his  eloquence 
and  science,  was  a  Benedictine  Monk  of  Orbais  in  France,  and  flourished 
y,bout  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century.  Our  author  uniformly  calls  him 
Godeschalcus,  thus  confounding  him  with  a  deacon  of  the  Church  of 
Liege,  who  flourished  about  the  year  7&T,  and  is  known  in  che  literary 
annals  of  tl.e  Church,  as  the  author  of  the  life  of  St.  Lambert  the  martyr, 
a  book  filled  with  legends  and  lying  wonders. 


Rsmev)  of  Haxveis^  Church  History,  385 

^*  Ego  Goteschalcus  credo  et  conflteor  quod  gemina  est 
praedestinatio,  sive  Electorum  ad  requiem,  sive  Reprobo- 
rum  ad  mortem  :  quia  sicut  Deus  incommutabilis,  ante 
mundi  constitutionem  omnes  electos  suos  incommutabiliter, 
per  gratuitam  gratiam  suam  prsedestinavit  ad  vitam  seter- 
nam :  Similiter  omnino  omnes  Reprobos,  qui  in  die  judicii 
damnabuutur  propter  ipsorum  mala  merita,  idem  ipse  in- 
commutabilis  Deus,  per  justum  judicium  suum  incommu- 
tabiliter  prsedestinavit  ad  mortem  merito  sempiternam."^ 
Tiiis  is,  indeed,  Calvinisni  sufficiently  harsh  ;  but  he  else- 
where softens  it  in  the  following  manner  : 

"  lUos  omnes  impios  et  peccatores,  quos  proprio  fuso 
sanguine  filius  Dei  redimere  yenit,  hos  omnipotens  Dei  bo- 
nitas  ad  vitam  praedestinatqs,  irretractabiliter  salvari  tantum- 
jnodo  velit :  illos  omnes  impios  et  peccatores,  pro  quibus 
idem  Dei  filius  nee  corpus  assuujpsit,  nee  orationem,  nee 
dico,  sanguinem  fudit,  neque  pro  eis  ullo  modo  crucifixus 
fuit,  quippe  quos  pessimos  futuros  esse  prcescivit^  quosque 
justissime  in  aeterna  prsecipitandos  torrejenta  praefinivit,  ipsos 
omnino  perpetim  salvari  penitus  nolit."t 

In  this  last  extract,  the  reader  perceives  that  the  predesti- 
nation and  reprobation  of  Goteschalcus  are  conditional ;  and 
though  he  errs,  not  knowing  the  scripture,  when  he  says  that 
Christ  was  not,  in  any  respect^  crucified  for  the  impious  and 
the  wicked,  whom  he  has  certainly  redeemed  fron>  the  ever- 
iasting  power  of  the  grave^  yet  the  error  carries  in  it  no- 
thing of  blasphemy.  Indeed,  we  strongly  suspect,  that  had 
Dr.  Haweis  weighed  well  the  import  of  this  passage,  he 
would  not  have  lamented  so  loudly  and  so  long  over  the 
fate  of  "  poor  Goteschalcus  and  his  doctrine ;"  for  modi- 
fied Calvinism  like  this,  seems  not  to  be  what  he  calls  "  the 
truths  of  vital  godliness."  At  any  rate,  it  ill  became  him  to 
stigmatize  the  opposers  of  Calvinism  in  a  body,  with  the 
ppithets  of   "  unhumbled,   unawakencd,   pharisaical    and 

*  Apud  Hincmar.  de  prsedest.  cap.  v.        j  Ibicl.  cap.  xxvii.  &  xxix. 

49 


385  Reoiew  of  Haweis'  Church  HhtoYy. 

proud  ;"  for  a  greater  proof  of  the  pride  of  his  own  heait 
cannot  be  conceived  than  he  furnishes  by  thus  seating  him- 
self in  the  chair  of  infallibility,  and  pouring  forth  railing  ac- 
cusations against  such  men  as  the  Bishops  Taylor  and 
Home. 

But  he  is  still  more  inexcusable,  if  an  excuse  be  not  found 
in  his  ignorance,  when,  after  using  such  language  as  this,  he 
goes  on  to  say,  that  "  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  hath  a 
near  connection  with  that  oi predestination  and  grace."  Was 
the  late  Mr.  Jones  of  Nayland's  faith  in  the  Trinity  not 
sound  ?  We  hardly  think  that  even  our  author  will  dare  to 
say  so ;  and  yet  it  is  not  possible  for  two  Christians  to  think 
more  differently  than  Mr.  Jones  and  he  on  the  subjects  of 
predestination  and  grace.  To  be  convinced  of  this,  let  the 
reader  only  compare  the  two  admirable  letters  by  Mr.  Jones, 
on  the  modem  doctrine  of  predestination,  published  in  the 
fifth  volume  of  our  journal,  with  the  following  modest  ac- 
count which  Dr.  Haweis  gives  of  himself  and  his  brother 
Calvinists  in  this  imperfect  history  : 

"  The  natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  which  be  of 
the  spirit  of  God,  neither  can  he  know  them,  because  they 
are  spiritually  discerned.  Happily,  the  Lord,  in  every  age, 
though  they  were  but  few  comparatively — (what  were  few  ? 
the  ages !) — taught  some  the  grace  of  God,  which  bringeth 
salvation ;  and  to  this  day  a  generation,  according  to  the 
election  of  grace,  can  say  wherein  we  stand,  and  rejoice  in 
hope  of  the  glory  of  God !!!" 

We  have  an  account  of  the  conversion  of  the  northern 
nations,  in  the  tenth  century,  to  the  Christianity  which  was 
then  professed  in  the  churches  of  Rome  and  Constantinople; 
and  the  author  gives  a  rapid  sketch,  certainly  not  softened, 
of  the  shocking  immoralities  which  prevailed  among  the 
clergy.  No  dissenter  or  deist  could  give  stronger  colouring 
to  such  descriptions  ;  though  here,  as  every  where  else,  we 
feel  the  want  of  references  to  the  original  authors. 

The  eleventh  century  o^iens,  in  this  work,  with  a  brief 


Review  of  Haweis*  Church  Historij.  387 

^ccouilt  of  the  crusades  in  Palestine ;  whence  the  author 
proceeds  to  the  contests  between  the  Emperor  Otho  and 
Pope  Gregory  the  seventh ;  and  concludes,  as  usual,  with  a 
detail  of  the  almost  universal  corruption  of  faith  and  morals. 
The  period  was  a  busy  one,  and  the  narrative  of  its  transac- 
tions is  animated  and  interesting.  A  just  tribute  is  paid  to 
the  memory  of  Berenger,  for  opposing  the  doctrine  of  tran- 
substantiation,  not  yet  universally  received  in  the  western 
church;  but  the  author  betrays  his  ignorance  of  the  Aristote- 
lian philosophy,  when  he  says  it  was  ridiculous  to  attempt, 
by  means  of  it,  to  defend  so  monstrous  an  absurdity.  The 
Aristotelian  division  of  body  into  matter  and  form^  which 
maif  exist  separately^  is  admirably  fitted  for  the  support  of 
transubstantiation ;  and  we  have  often  been  tempted  to  be- 
lieve, that,  on  this  account,  and  on  this  only,  the  philoso- 
phy of  the  Lyceum  was  in  the  middle  ages  so  generally  pre- 
ferred to  that  of  the  Academy,  The  consequences  here 
attributed  to  the  prevalence  of  monkery  certainly  sprung 
from  that  system ;  but,  for  the  credit  of  the  Albigenses, 
we  hope  that  they  were  not  a  spawn  of  the  Faulinians. 

The  history  of  the  twelfth  century  exhibits  nothing  very 
different  from  that  which  prevailed  in  the  preceding.  The 
crusades  were  carried  on  with  disgrace  to  the  arms  of 
Christian  Europe ;  new  contests  arose  between  the  Empe- 
ror and  the  Pope ;  the  northern  powers  continued  to  con- 
vert their  Pagan  subjects  and  neighbours  by  the  sword; 
and  the  most  ridiculous  questions  were  debated  among  the 
monks  with  the  utmost  keenness.  This,  however,  kept 
inquiry  alive,  and  sent  the  lover  of  truth  to  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures and  the  earliest  uninspired  writers  of  the  church. 

Hence  much  gospel  truth  was  brought  to  light ;  and  the 
Waldenses,  of  whom  our  author  gives  a  just  account,  got  a 
firm  footing  in  various  countries  of  Europe.  In  this  century 
were  founded  several  universities,  though  the  Christians 
were  still  indebted,  for  what  knowledge  they  obtained  of 
the  most  useful  sciences,  to  the  Saracens  i  and  a  copy  of  the 


38$  Review  of  Haweis^.  Chui'ch  History. 

pandects  being  discovered,  suggested  to  the  Pope  the  ex* 
pedieftt  of  digesting  under  similar  heads  the  various  canons 
and  decrees  pubhshed  at  different  periods  by  councils  and 
pontiffs.  Hence  the  origin  of  the  canon  law^  which  being 
conjoined  with  the  civile  was  taught  as  a  science  in  the  uni- 
versities, and  gave  i-ise  to  the  degrees  of  L.  L,  B.  and  L, 
L.  D.  at  that  period,  or  soon  afterwards,  the  most  highly- 
valued  of  all  academical  honours,  because  the  reward  of 
the  science  employed  with  most  success  in  support  of  papal 
usurpation,'^ 

The  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  present  to  liS 
scenes  in  all  respects  similar  to  those  which  we  have  viewed 
in  the  preceding.  Crusades  in  Palestine  and  Egypt  against 
the  followers  of  Mohammed,  and  in  Europe  against  the 
Albigenses ;  contests  between  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor, 
and  between  his  holiness  and  the  French  King  ;  schisms  in 
the  papacy  producing  anathemas  from  Pope  against  Pope  $ 
the  rise  of  dominician  and  franciscan  orders  of  monks ;  the 
ridiculous  disputes  among  the  frahciscans  themselves;  andl 
the  devotion  of  the  monks  of  all  orders  to  the  court  of 
Home,  are  here  placed  before  us  in  glowing  colours.  This 
part  of  the  work  is  extremely  well  written,  and  not  dis» 
graced  by  oui*  author's  usual  illiberality  to  those  who  think 
differently  from  himself  respecting  the  distinguishing  dog- 
mas of  Calvin.  He  shows  that  the  disputes  among  the 
nionks  contributed  much  to  the  rise  of  the  Lollards  on  the 
continent,  while  they  stimulated  our  countryman  WicklifT 
to  search  in  the  scriptures  for  that  truth  which  he  could 
not  find  in  the  schools.  We  have  likewise  some  account 
of  the  missions  to  Tartary  and  China,  and  of  the  stop  put 
to  the  progress  of  Christianity  in  the  east,  by  the  victorious 
arms  of  the  bigotted  Tamerlane. 

•  It  was,  perhaps,  the  discovery  of  this  fact  that  induced  our  Pro- 
Instant  historian,  after  he  had  inadvertently  taken  the  degree  of  L.  L. 
B.  to  proceed  to  Doctor  in  Physic;  a  process  certainly  uncommon  ampins; 
clergymen,  or  men  of  general  literature. 


jRmew  of  ffaweis^  Chunk  Bistofy.  5§9 

But  ^e  hasten  to  the  fifteenth  century,  of  which  the  his- 
ton%  in  the  work  before  us,  opens  with  the  fall  of  the  East- 
ern Empire,  the  discovery  of  the  new  world,  and  the  ef-f 
facts  of  those  great  events  on  the  progress  of  letters  and 
Christianity.  At  the  beginning  of  this  sera,  there  were  nd 
fewer  than  three  Popes,  each  claiming  the  sovereignty  of 
the  visible  church,  and  denouncing  anathemas  against  the 
anti-popes  and  their  various  adherents,  as  well  nations  as 
individuals.  To  put  an  end  to  this  confusion,  the  council  of 
Constance  was  called,  which  deposed  two  of  the  Popes; 
and,  the  third  giving  in  his  resignation,  a  new  Pope  was 
chosen,  who,  by  the  name  of  Martin  the  fifth,  assumed 
the  ecclesiastical  supremacy  over  the  western  world.  The 
Greek  church,  though  prostrate  in  the  dust,  still  maintained^ 
as  at  this  day  she  maintains,  her  independence  of  the  sed 
of  Rome,  acknowledging  no  visible  superior  tb  her  owrt 
patriarchs.  The  principal  transactions  of  the  council  of 
Constance  weire  the  condeirination  of  John  Huss  and  Je- 
rome of  Prague  to  the  flames,  in  direct  violation  of  the 
promise  given  to  the  former  of  these  tnart)a's  by  the  Empe- 
ror Sigismund ;  the  ordering  of  the  bones  of  WicklifF  to  be 
dug  up  and  burnt ;  and  the  decree  for  withholding  the  sa- 
cramental cup  from  the  laity.  Another  council  was  called, 
during  this  century,  at  Pavia,  which  deposed  Pope  Euge- 
nius  ;  and  the  schisms  and  dissentions  which  this  occa- 
sioned, paved  the  way  for  the  reformation. 

We  have  accompanied  this  impartial  historian  through 
1500  years  of  the  Christian  church,  and  have  now  arrived 
with  him  at  the  sera  of  the  reformation.  Being  as  little 
attached  to  popery  and  its  corruptions,  as  any  chaplain  of 
the  late  Countess  of  Huntingdon  can  be,  we  agree  with 
Dr.  Haweis  that  it  is  an  important  aera— ^even  the  sera  of 
the  revival  of  genuine  Christianity^  Our  zeal,  however, 
does  not  prompt  us,  as  his  zeal  has  prompted  him,  to  plead 
for  the  immaculate  purity  of  the  motives  by  which  the 
earliest  reformers  were  influenced  in  every  stage  of  their 


&90  Review  of  Haweis'  Chunk  History, 

controversy  with  the  church  and  court  of  Rome.  We  cer- 
tainly believe  that  "  Luther,  in  his  faint  opposition  to  the 
corruptions  of  the  age,  was  animated  not  by  zeal  for  truth, 
but  either  by  avarice  or  by  mean  envy  for  the  glory  of  his 
order  neglected  by  a  preference  of  the  Dominicans  ;"  and 
yet,  if  our  author  include  us  among  those  "  popish  adver- 
saries or  infidel  historians,  to  whom^  he  says,  malignity 
and  hatred  of  gospel-truth  suggested  this  opinion,"  we 
hesitate  not  to  say  to  him'— ^Mentiris  itnpudentissime.  We 
are  so  far  from  being  ashamed  of  receiving  benefit  from 
such  men  as  Martin  Luther  and  Henry  the  eighth,  that  we 
bless  the  hand  which  turned  the  avarice  of  the  one,  and 
the  luxury  of  the  other,  from  their  natural  mischiefs,  to 
become  instruments  of  the  choicest  blessings— even  the  re- 
covery of  LETTERS,  and  the  restoration  of  religion.  But 
we  are  not  surprised  that  Erasmus,  though  he  saw  the 
errors  of  the  church  more  clearly  than  Luther  himself, 
*'  trembled  at  the  rude  hand  of  hasty  reform  j"  nor  does 
our  charity,  notwithstanding  his  modest  expression,  permit 
us  to  say  that  it  was  only  the  cowardice  of  his  ov/n  spirit 
which  made  him  fear  "  to  be  involved  in  the  dangers  that 
he  apprehended."  Such  sentences  can  proceed  only  from 
the  mouths  and  pens  of  Calvinists,  who  affect  to  be 
searchers  of  hearts  and  discovers  of  spirits. 

Dr.  Haweis  draws  an  amiable,  and,  in  general,  a  just 
character  of  Melancthon ;  though  he  says,  that  "  the  yield- 
ing temper  of  that  reformer,  his  love  of  peace,  and  some 
educational  prejudices  respecting  church  unity  and  schism^ 
led  him  sometimes  into  concessions  injurious  to  the  cause 
which  he  defended." 

We  have  seen  that,  in  our  author's  opinion,  schism  is  no 
sin,  and  church  unity  unworthy  of  the  regard  of  a  spiritu- 
ally-minded man;  but  Melancthon  thought  otherwise-— 
''  Would  to  heaven,  (says  he)  that  I  could  not  only  not 
enfeeble  the  power  of  bishops,  but  establish  their  dominion  ; 
for  I  see  but  too  well,  what  sort  of  church  we  are  likely  ts 


Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History,  391 

bave,  if  we  demolish  ecclesiastical  government;  I  am, 
sure  that  the  tyranny  we  have  escaped  (viz.  that  of  Rome) 
will  then  be  nothing  to  that  which  we  shall  see  established."^ 

This,  however,  is  not  the  only  educational  prejudice 
which  our  impartial  historian  undoubtedly  finds  in  the 
writings  of  Melancthon.  That  great  and  good  man  was 
no  Calvinist^  as  appears  as  well  from  his  Letter  to  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer,  as  from  what  he  teaches,  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  concerning  the  promise  of  grace,  and  justifica- 
tion. In  the  Letter  he  says,  "  Nimis  horridae  fuerunt 
initio  stoicce  disputationes  apud  nostras  defato^  et  disciplinse 
Xiocuerunt.  Quare  te  rogo,  ut  de  tali  aliqua  formula  doctrinse 
cogitas."  In  the  Confession  he  thus  expresses  himself: 
"  Non  est  hie  opus  disputationibus  de  prsedestinatione  aut 
similibus.  ^-exa promusw  est  universalis  ;  et  nihil  detrahit 
Gperibus,  imo  exsuscitat  ad  fidem,  et  vere  bona  opera." 

Such  offences  as  these  are  not  to  be  forgiven  by  our 
orthodox  historian,  who  yet,  strange  to  tell,  speaks  of  Zu- 
inglius  in  terms  of  the  highest  respect.  "  Though  not 
alike  famed  with  Luther,  he  may  justly  (says  our  author) 
rank  his  equal  in  piety,  in  learning  his  superior."  Would 
the  reader,  after  this,  suppose  that  on  free-will^  grace^  ekc' 
tion^  and  reprobation^  Zuinglius  held  opinions  little  different 
from  those  of  Pelagius  on  the  same  subjects  ?  We  men- 
tion not  his  mean  notions  of  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  or  his  making  the  church  the  creature  of  the  state. 
In  the  foiTfner  of  these  opinions,  Dr.  Haweis  probably  agrees 
with  him  ;  and  though  he  himself  makes  the  church  the 
creature  of  the  mob,  we  are  not  surprised  at  his  preferring 
Erastionisjn  to  Apostolical  authority.  But,  in  the  name  of 
consistency,  how  comes  he  to  praise  the  reformer,  who 
maintained  that  heaven  is  open  to  all  who  live  according 
to  the  light  vouchsafed  to  them  ;  and  who  seem  not  to  have 
believed  in  original  sin  ?    To  talk  of  the  "  moderate  tem- 

*  Seward's  Anegdoteg,  vol.  iii,  p.  129. 


$^2  .-fievzffw  of  Haxveis^  Church  History. 

per  and  selfrcomniand"  of  Zuinglius,  would  be  ridiculous  in 
^ny  man  who  knows  that  he  put  off  the  character  of  a  cler- 
gyman to  assume  that  of  a  soldier,  and  died  fighting  for  his 
ppinions  against  the  Cantons,  whom  he  had  not  been  able, 
hy  reasoning,  to  convert  to  the  protestant  faith  ;  but  of  the 
particulars  of  this  fact  our  diligent  and  impartial  historian 
imist  be  supposed  ignorant.  He  is  not  ignorant,  however, 
^hat  Zuinglius  and  Luther  differed  widely  in  their  opinions 
respecting  the  Lord^s  Supper ^  which,  he  says,  "  is  a  subject 
unworthy  of  contest;"  and,  apologizing  for  them,  he 
Requests  us  to  "  remember  that  the  best  of  men  are  but  mm 
m  the  best!'" 

Hi^  praises  ctf  Calvin  are  not  much  higher  than  we^ 
expected  from  him  ;  yet  an  historian  truly  impartial,  after 
observing  that  this  far-famed  reformer  "  embraced  the 
doctrines  of  truth,  and  adorned  them  by  a  conversation 
the  most  exemplary^'*  would  have  related,  with  due  horror, 
the  burning  of  Servetus  at  a  stake,  instead  of  slurring 
Calvin's  guilt  with--^"  ff  this  were  a  just  charge,  let  the 
jreproach  rest  upon  him!"  When  he  passed  this  feeble 
censure  on  the  apostle  of  Geneva,  he  had  surely  forgotten 
his  own  maxim,  that  "  no  mian  ought  to  vindicate,  or,  as 
he  might  have  added,  extenuate,  abuses  in  the  cause  of 
protestantism,  whilst  he  pleads  against  them  in  the  hand  of 
popery." 

Notwithstanding  these  effusions  of  prejudice  and  partialis 
t)%  he  gives  a  rapid  and  well  written  sketch  of  the  progress 
of  the  reformation  in  Germany,  France,  Switzerland,  Swe- 
den, Denmark,  and  Norway  ;  and  then  proceeds  to  state  the 
doctrines  of  the  reformation,  and  to  contend,  in  direct  op- 
position to  what  he  had  before  related  of  the  contests  of 
Luther,  Carlestadt,  and  Zuinglius,  for  a  union  of  sentiment 
among  the  reformers  J 

What  he  calls  the  doctrines  of  the  reformation  are  iht 
peculiar  opinions  of  Calvin  and  his  more  rigid  adherents, 
which,  of  course,  we  must  suppose  are  all  that  he  deems 


Reoiertv  of  Haweis^  Church  History.  393 

necessary  to  be  received  by  the  Romish  Church  to  restore 
her  to  primitive  purity.  The  condemnation  of  image- 
worship,  of  transubstantiation,  of  the  invocation  of  saints  ; 
the  denial  of  purgatory  and  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope  ; 
and  the  restoration  of  the  cup  to  the  laity  in  communion, 
as  well  as  of  the  privilege  of  marriage  to  the  clergy,  are 
not  deemed  worthy  of  notice  among  the  doctrines  which 
the  first  reformers  unanimously  maintained !  The  funda- 
mental truths,  in  which  all  the  eminent  men  among  them 

concurred,  were  only 

:  "  1.  Of  God's  eternal  purpose  and  predestination  of  an 
elect  people^  and  those,  comparatively yt'w,  ordained  to  life 
and  glory  eternal.  2.  That  man  had  lost  all  ability  to  da 
good^  and  freedom  of  xvill  to  choose  it ;  and  was  in  his 
nature,  as  fallen,  inclined  onlv  to  evil.  3.  That  nothing 
ever  did  or  can  alter  this  propensity  of  the  human  hearty 
but  the  Holy  Ghost  by  his  own  immediate  agency  on  the 
souls  of  men.  4.  That  a  sinner  is,  and  can  be  justified  by 
faith  only;  and  this  not  of  himself,  being  unable  either  to 
comprehend  or  receive  the  things  that  be  of  the  Spirit  of 
God ;  and  therefore,  the  faith  itself  must  be  the  gift  of 
God,  5.  That  merit  in  creatures  there  is  none  nor  ever  can 
*  be.  From  first  to  last  a  sinner  must  be  saved  by  grace. 
6.  That  the  vicarious  atonement  by  the  one  oblation  of 
Christ  upon  the  Cross  is  effectual,  not  for  the  many  called^ 
but  for  they^ry  chosen,^'' 

Were  we  less  aci{uainted  than  we  are  with  the  principles 
and  views  of  Dr.  Haweis,  we  should  indeed  be  surprised 
by  his  hardy  assertion,  that  "  these  are  the  things  which  the 
reformers  uniformly  held ;"  whilst  he  passes,  without 
notice,  so  many  other  things,  about  which  all  Europe 
knows  that  there  was  no  controversy  among  them.  But, 
how  does  he  prove  the  unanimity  of  the  reformers  in  hold- 
ing these  abstruse  dogmas  of  Calvinism  ?  Why,  as  usual, 
by  his  own  confident  assertions,  and  by  partial  extracts 
from  the  correspondence  of  Luther  with  Erasmus ! 

50 


394  Meww  of  Hawezs^  Church  History, 

^  Melanethon's  sentiments  respecting  predestination  and 
election  we  have  already  exhibited  in  his  own  words,  to 
which  it  is  hoped  that  all  our  readers,  who  have  not  been 
^hapl^ns  to  the  late  Countess  of  Huntingdon,  will  give  as 
much  credit  as  to  the  unsupported  assertion  of  our  hnpartial 
historian.  The  sentiments  of  Zuinglius  respecting  these 
subjects  may  be  safely  inferred  from  the  following  address 
of  the  minister  to  the  godfathers  and  godmothers  of  chil* 
dren  brought  to  be  baptized,  which  the  reader  will  find  in 
the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  Zurich,  of  which  ZuingUus 
was  the  founder : — "  Consider,  therefore,  that  it  is  the 
will  of  God  our  Saviour,  that  all  men  should  attain  unto 
the  knowledge  of  his  will,  through  our  only  Mediator 
Jesus  Christ,  who  gave  himself  up  for  the  redemption  of. 
ALL  MANKiND."*^  Is  this  Calviuism,  or  what  our  author 
calls  gospel  truth  ? 

The  quotation  from  Luther  proves,  indeed,  that  he  held 
the  most  shocking  of  the  tenets  which  have  usually  beew 
attributed  to  Calvin  as  their  author ;  but  it  proves,  at  the. 
same  time,  that,  in  controversy,  he  substituted  petulance  for 
argument,  and  scrupled  not  to  pervert  the  meaning  of  scrip- 
ture to.  support  his  cause.  Erasmus  had  said — "  What  can 
be  more  useless,  than  to  publish  this  paradox  to  the  world  ? 
namely,  that  whatever  we  do,  is  done,  not  by  virtue  of  our 
qwnfree  willy  but  in  a  way  of  necessity  y"*  &c.  To  this  very 
pertinent  question,  Luther,  after  a  number  of  sarcasms, 
which  the  respect  due  to  learning,  genius,  and  virtue,  should 
bave  suppressed,  replies ;  "  You  urge,  where  is  either  the 
necessity  or  utility  of  preaching  predestination?  God  him- 
self teaches  it,  and  commands  us  to  teach  it,  and  that  is 
answer  sufficient.*' 

,  True !  if  God  command  us  to  teach  it,  no  other  answer- 
could  be  required  by  Erasmus,  or  will  be  required  by  any 
one  of  those  Churches,  in  which  Dr.  Haweis  says,  that "  the 

*  Littirgia  Figurina,  London,  169S. 


Mevkw  of  Ilaxveis}  Church  History,  895 

ddctrines  of  the  reformation  have  gone  out  of  vogue  :"  But 

where  is  this  command  to  be  found  ? 

Predestination,  we  shall  suppose  to  be  an  undoubted 
truth ;  but  we  find  no  mention  of  it  in  the  Gospels  nor  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  and  we  hardly  think  that  even 
the  zeal  of  our  author  will  contend,  that  in  these  five  in* 
spired  tracts,  all  the  ti'uths  are  not  to  be  found,  which  our 
blessed  Lord  commanded  his  followers  to  teach,  when  he 
said  to  the  eleven,  "  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach 
the  gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that  believeth  and  is  bap*- 
■tized,  shall  be  saved ;  and  he  that  believeth  not,  shall  be 
damned."  The  controversies  of  St.  Paul  with  the  Jews  and 
Greek  philosophers,  led  him  into  disquisitions  on  many  to- 
pics, to  which  Christians  might  for  ever  have  safely  re- 
mained strangers ;  and  which  illiterate  Christians  can  ne- 
ver comprehend.  Let  not  the  reader  be  startled  at  this  ast- 
Tsertion.  For  the  character  and  labours  of  St.  Paul  we  have 
the  highest  veneration,  and  believe  the  world  to  be  more 
indebted  to  him,  than  to  any  other  individual  minister  of 
Christ ;  but  even  St.  Peter,  though  he  did  not  presume,  like 
our  author,  to  charge  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  with 
temporizing-,  yet  acknowledged,  that,  "  in  his  epistles  are 
some  things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  they  who  are 
unlearned  and  unstable,  wrest  to  their  own  destruction." 

The  case,  indeed,  could  not  be  otherwise.  St.  Paul's 
epistles  are,  every  one  of  them,  addressed  to  particular 
'churches,  or  particular  men,  for  the  obvious  purpose  of 
^guarding  them  against  some  prevailing  errors^  and  unra- 
velling the  sophistry  of  the  Jews,  the  Gnostics,  the  Stoics, 
and  the  Epicureans.  This  being  the  case,  no  man  can  feel 
the  full  force  of  his  reasonings,  or  apprehend  the  precise 
meaning  of  the  terms  which  he  uses,  who  has  not  some 
knowledge  of  the  questions  that  were  agitated  among  those 
to  whom  his  epistles  were  immediately  addressed.  Sudh 
knowledge  can  never  be  the  portion  of  illiterate  Chris- 
tians, who  shall  therefore  be  saved,  if  they  believe  the  plain 
truths,  and  fulfil  the  duties  inculcated  in  the  four  gor,pels  ; 


S9^  Review  of  Haweis"  Church  History, 

though  they  perplex  not  themselves  with  the  things  iii  St^ 
Paul's  epistles,  which  St.  Peter  himself  thought  hard  to  be 
imderstoodi 

In  the  gospels,  thfen,  must  we  look  for  the  command 
which  Luther  says,  God  has  given  us  to  teach  ignorant 
men,  that  "  whatever  they  do,  is  done,  not  by  virtue  of  their 
own  free  will,  but  in  a  way  of  necessity^"  Instead  of  such  a 
command,  however,  he  produces  only  two  passages,  which, 
as  they  contain  no  command  of  any  kind,  are  nothing  to  the 
purpose.  The  former,  in  which  our  blessed  Lord  says,* 
*'  Many  are  called,  but  few  are  chosen,"  refers  obviously  to 
the  calling  of  the  Jews  by  the  first  preaching  of  the  gospel ; 
and  the  latter"]'  is  only  a  declaration  that  Christ  knew  the 
temper  and  disposition  of  those  whom  he  had  called  to  the 
apostleship.  After  telling  the  twelve  that  they  "  were  not 
all  clean,"  and  setting  them  an  example  of  condescension 
and  humility,  he  adds,  "  If  ye  know  these  things,  happy 
are  ye^  if  ye  do  them.  I  speak  not  of  you  all,  I  know  whom 
1  have  chosen :  but  that  the  Scripture  might  be  fulfilled,  he 
that  eateth  bread  with  me,  hath  lift  up  his  heel  against  me." 
If  these  words  could  be  supposed  to  have  any  relation  what- 
ever to  the  doctrine  of  election  and  reprobation,  (which  they 
plainly  have  not),  they  would  operate  with  the  force  of  de- 
monstration against  that  doctrine ;  for  they  declare  that 
Judas  was  chosen  as  well  as  St.  Peter. 

Aware  that  his  illustrious  correspondent  would  not  re- 
ceive these  two  texts  of  scripture,  as  the  command  of  God  to 
teach  that  what  we  do,  is  done,  not  by  virtue  of  our  own  free 
will,  hxitmaxvaij  of  necessity^  Luther  at  last  condescends 
to  point  out  to  him  the  utility  of  the  doctrine  :  "  It  tends, 
he  says,  to  humble  our  pride  !" 

Does  it  indeed  ?  Are  the  Calvinists,  in  general,  the  hum- 
blest of  mortals  ?  Or  does  this  impartial  histoiy  indicate  the 
extreme  humility  of  its  author  ?  Surely  the  man  who  pro* 
nounces  that  all  the  Catholic  writers  of  the  first  four  centu- 

*  Malt.  XX.  16.  t  St.  Johji  xiii.  18. 


kev'iew  of  Haweis*  Church  History*  397 

ries  arc  either  weak  or  wicked,  and  that  all  the  modems 
who  think  not  on  these  subjects  as  he  does,  are  "  destitute 
of  learning,  not  to  say  common  sense,"  has  no  pretensions 
whatever  to  humility.  Indeed,  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  how 
the  belief  of  unconditional  election  and  reprobation  can  pos- 
sibly humble  the  human  heart ;  for,  as  it  is  natural  for  him 
who  is  convinced  that  he  is  one  of  the  chosen  few,  to  look 
down  with  contempt  on  the  less  favoured  multitude  ;  so  he 
who  believes,  that  whatever  he  does,  is  done  by  necessity, 
may  indeed,  as  our  Church  teaches,*  "  be  thrust  either  into 
•desperation,  or  into  wretchedness  of  unclean  living;"  but 
he  cannot  be  humbled  by  the  consciousness  of  guilty  be- 
cause, though  a  murderer,  he  was  as  passive  an  instrument 
as  the  sword  by  which  he  perpetrated  the  deed.  By  the 
inward  operation  of  divine  grace,  the  elected  Calvinist  may 
indeed  be  kept  humble ;  but,  by  the  same  operation,  the 
virtuous  remonstrant  may  likewise  be  kept  humble  ;  espe- 
cially as  he  is  conscious  that  a//  his  sins  are  chargeable  on 
himself. 

But  the  reformer  adds  another  reason  to  prove  the  utility 
of  this  doctrine. 

"  It  is  one  of  the  highest  degrees  of  faith,  he  says,  sted- 
fastly  to  believe  that  God  is  infinitely  merciful,  though  he 
saves,  comparatively,  but  few,  and  condemns  so  many  ;  and 
that  he  is  strictly  just,  though  of  his  own  will  he  makes 
such  numbers  of  mankind  necessarily  liable  to  damnation. 
These  are  some  of  the  unseen  things,  whereof  faith  is  the 
evidence.  Whereas,  were  it  in  my  power  to  comprehend 
them,  or  clearly  to  make  out  hoiv  God  is  both  inviolably 
just,  and  infinitely  merciful,  notwithstanding  the  display  of 
wrath,  and  seeming  inequality  in  his  dispensations,  respec- 
ing  the  reprobate,  faith  would  have  little  or  nothing  to  do." 

And  this  jargon  Dr.  Haweis  calls  a  "  triumphant  reply !" 
forgetting,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  that  God  himself  appeals  to 

*  irth  Article. 


f|0  ReviexD  of  Haiveis^  Church  Hhtdi^y, 

human  judgment  for  the  iqidty  of  his  ways,  which  he  surely 
would  not  have  done,  if  divine  justice  had  been  altogether 
incomprehensible  by  man.  In  the  first  chapter  of  Isaiah's 
prophecies,  he  calls  upon  the  Jews  to  reason  with  him  on  the 
subject,  and,  by  the  mouth  of  Ezekiel,  thus  addresses  them: 
"  Yet  ye  say,  the  way  of  the  Lord  is  not  equal.  Hear 
now,  O  house  of  Israel!  Is  not  my  way  equal?  are  not  your 
ways  unequal?"  A  question,  which  the  house  of  Israel 
could  not  have  answered,  were  there  any  truth  in  this  rea- 
soning of  Luther's. 

Let  not  the  reader  be  scandalized  at  the  freedom  with 
which  we  treat  the  dogmas  and  reasonings  of  this  great 
reformer.  To  use  the  language  of  a  celebrated  historian,^ 
"  The  knowledge  of  truth  was  not  poured  into  his  mind  all 
at  once,  by  any  special  revelation  :  he  acquired  it  by  in- 
dustry and  meditation,  and  his  progress,  of  consequence, 
was  gradual."  He  was  liable,  therefore,  to  all  the  mistakes 
of  other  students ;  and  was  destitute  of  many  aids,  which 
we  now  possess,  for  the  discovery  of  religious  truth.  Whilst 
the  irascibility  of  his  own  temper,  resenting  the  ill  treat- 
ment which  he  received  from  the  church  of  Rome,  drove 
him,  perhaps,  too  far  from  the  creed  of  that  church  in  some 
points  of  doctrine,  the  inveterate  prejudices  of  education 
made  him  symbolize  too  much  with  her  in  others  ;  and  be 
it  remembered,  that,  if  he  thought  "  the  truths  respecting 
predestination  in  all  its  branches,  should  be  taught  and  pub^ 
lished^''  the  reformers  of  our  own  church  were  of  a  very- 
different  opinion  ;'j'  and  that  if  deference  be  due  to  human 
authority,  it  is  to  them^  and  not  to  Luther,  that  ive  are  to 
pay  it. 

From  this  digression  respecting  the  union  of  sentiments 
among  the  most  eminent  reformers,  the  author  returns  to 
the  history  of  the  church.  His  detail  of  ecclesiastical  affairs, 


*  jRobert son's  History  of  Charles  V. 

T  See  the  conclusion  of  the  17th  Article. 


Review  of  Haweis'  Church  History*  377 

fixntt  the  diet  of  Augsburg,  ta  the  religious  peace  in  the 
same  city,  is  not  sufficiently  minute ;  and  he  has  produced  no 
good  authority  for  his  belief,  that  the  Emperor  Charles  the 
fifth  died  in  the  protestant  faith.   The  superstitious  mumme- 
ries of  that  monarch,  at  the  end  of  his  life,  are  indeed  alto- 
gether inconsistent  with  the  supposition  ;  and  Dr.  Haweis 
might  have  found,  in  the  spirit  and  temper  of  Philip,  a  suf- 
ficient reason  for  the  cruel  treatment  of  Charles's  friends 
and  confessor,  without  supposing  that  a  Romish  priest  and 
Romish  bishop  countenanced  the  apostacy  of  the  Emperor 
from   the  Romish  faith !    With  Robertson,  however,  we 
think  it  is  not  improbable,  that  Charles,  "  having  found,  af- 
ter repeated  trials,  that  he  could  not  bring  any  two  clocks 
or  watches  to  go  exactly  alike,  might  reflect,  with  a  mixture 
of  surprize  as  well  as  regret,  on  his  own  folly,  in  having 
bestowed  so  much  time  and  labour  on  the  mere  vain  at- 
tempt of  bringing  mankind  to  a  precise  uniformity  of  senti- 
ment concerning  the  profound  and  mysterious  doctrines  of 
religion."    This  was  a  reflection  worthy  of  the  most  saga* 
cious  monarch  of  his  age,  when,  freed  from  the  cares  of  go- 
vernment, he  was  at  leisure  to  meditate  coolly  on  the  powers, 
passions,  and  prejudices  of  the  human  mind. 

In  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  book  which  contains  the  his- 
toiy  of  the  sixteenth  century,  we  have  a  rapid  detail  of  the 
progress  of  the  reformation  in  England,  Scotland,  Ireland, 
Denmark,  Norway,  Sweden,  Brandenburg,  Prussia  and 
Germany.  There  is,  however,  nothing  in  it  to  which  our 
readers  can  be  supposed  strangers,  except  a  ludicrous  story, 
not  worthy  of  repetition,  respecting  Dr.  Cole  and  the  kna%>e 
of  clubs  ;  an  erroneous  account  of  the  constitution  of  the  first 
reformed  church  in  Scotland ;  and  an  acknowledgment,  we 
suppose  inadvertendy  made,  that  the  Augsburg  confession 
is  not  Calvinistic,  and,  of  course,  that  what  was  formerly 
said  of  the  Calvinism  of  Melancthon,  is  a  falsehood ! 

We  have  more  than  once,  in  reviewing  this  work,  had 
occasion  to  remark,  that  to  the  impartiality  of  an  historian. 


wo  Keview  of  Haweis^  Church  History, 

diligence  and  accuracy  are  as  essential  as  the  love  of  truth; 
and,  if  our  learned  ^nd  candid  author  had  given  himself  the 
trouble  to  read  Skmner^s  Ecclefiiastical  History;  Bishop 
Sage's  Fundamental  Charter  of  Presbyter  if  ;  or  even  the  Zi- 
turgy  compiled  for  the  use  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  by 
the  reformer  Knox,  he  would  hardly  have  dared  to  express 
himself  in  the  following  terms  : 

"  The  intrepid  Knox  having  formed  with  Calvin,  at  Ge- 
neva, the  strictest  friendship,  and  adopted  all  his  opinions 
respecting  church  government,  be  returned  to  his  native 
land ;  and  with  his  rough  eloquence,  and  hardihood  that 
knew  no  fear,  he  bore  down  all  opposition,  overturned  the 
whole  Popish  hierarchy,  and  established  the  Presbyterian 
government  in  its  stead,  to  which  the  church  of  Scotland 
still  adheres, ^^ 

^  We  pass  over  the  obvious  intention  to  deceive,  in  the  stu- 
died ambiguity  of  the  last  clause  of  this  sentence  ;  and  only 
beg  leave  to  refer  our  spiritually-minded  man,  to  the  works 
which  we  have  mentioned,  for  a  complete  proof  that  the 
Presbyterian  form  of  church  government  was  introduced 
into  Scotland,  not  by  John  Knox,  but  by  Andrew  Melville  ; 
and,  that  for  the  first  fifteen  year^,  the  reformed  church  was 
governed  by  super intendants^  for  the  ordination  of  whom 
John  Knox  drew  up  2i  form,  Superintendants,  however, 
resemble  bishops ;  and  such  is  our  pious  priest's  unreniit- 
ting  zeal  to  excite  the  rancour  of  the  multitude  against  that 
order  of  men,  that,  speaking  of  those,  who,  in  the  reign  of 
our  Henry  the  eighth  embraced  the  '^  evangelical  doctrines," 
he  says, 

"  Some  of  them,  as  the  excellent  Bilney,  by  whom  Lati- 
mer was  converted,  with  Frith,  and  other  worthies,  fell 
victims  to  episcopal  persecution,  and  died  in  flames  !" 

When  you  wrote  this  very  extraordinary  sentence,  (give 
us  leave.  Sir,  to  ask  you  solemnly)  what  impression  did 
you  mean  to  make  on  the  minds  of  your  readers  I  You 
knov/  perfecdy  well,  that  the  persecutions  under  the  reigu 


Heview  of  Hcnveis^  Church  History.  401 

of  Henry,  can  no  more  be  called  episcopal^  than  presbifterial 
persecutions  ;  but  do  you  not  likewise  know,  that  your  ad- 
mirers— the  infatuated  frequenters  of  Lady  Huntingdon's 
chapels — will  understand  you  as  here  charging  bishops  of 
-every  co7nmunion  with  cherishing,  in  the  churches  which 
they  govern,  a  spirit  of  persecution?  That  the  charge,  is 
Jalse^  a  stronger  proof  cannot  be  wished  for,  than  that  the 
rector  of  All-Saints^  Aldwinckle^  has  never  been  censured, 
either  for  his  schismatical  practices  at  Bath,  or  for  the  num- 
berless insinuations  of  a  maUcious  tendency  with  which  this 
history  teems  against  the  regular  clergy  of  the  church  of 
England.  .         . 

•  We  pass  over  the  two  next  chapters,  on  the  learning  and 
heresies  of  the  times,  and  on  the  accessions  made  to  the  Chris- 
tian Church  ;  because  from  them  the  reader  can  learn  no- 
thing, except  that  the  author,  differing  widely  from  Bacon, 
is  of  opinion,  that  "  the  more  advanced  in  science  proceeded 
to  the  summit  of  wisdom,  to  know  that  there  is  no  GodJ^^ 
■  The  seventh  chapter,  on  the  Progress  of  the  true  Churchy 
exhibits  a  melancholy  picture  of  the  religion  of  those  who, 
in  the  western  world,  acknowledged  the  supremacy  of  the 
Pope,  and,  in  the  east,  that  of  the  Patriarch  of  Constan- 
tinople. The  author,  however,  had  surely  forgotten  his  own 
definition  of  gospel  doctrines,  when,  speaking  of  the  Greek 
Christians,  he  chose  to  affirm,  that "  they  are  tenacious  onlys 
of  their  miserable  forms  and  ceremonies,  in  which  all  their 
Christianity  consists,  and  strangers  alike  to  the  gospel  doc- 
trines, and  the  purity  of  godliness."  According  to  him,  pre- 
destination is  the  most  important  of  all  gospel  doctrines; 
and  we  learn  from  Dr.  King,'^  not  only  that  it  is  a  dogma 
of  the  Greek  church,  but  also  that  it  is  treated  by  some  of 
the  Russian  clergy,  "  with  a  much  better  kind  of  logic  than 
that  with  which  such  points  are  generally  discussed,"  When 
Dr.  Haweis  shall  have  read  this,  or  rather  the   work  t© 

*  Rif^s  and  Cereinof:ies  of  the  Greek  Church,  &c. 
5X 


402  Review  of  Haweis*  Church  Nistory*^ 

which  we  have  referred  him,  we  trust,  that  his  candour  wilL 
impel  him  to  make,  through  the  medium  of  the  Russian 
Ambassador,  a  proper  apolog\'  to  the  Archbishop  of  No^ 
vogorod,  for  having  thus  inadvertently  calumniated  tke^ 
brethren  ! 

The  ac<:ount  of  the  Lutheran  churches  is  given  with  less 
partiality  than  our  author  usually  betrays.  It  proves  with 
the  force  of  demonstration,  that  the  earliest  reformers  werei 
not  agreed  in  holding  the  doctrine  of  unconditional  election 
and  reprobation  ;  that  the  followers  of  Melancthon  were,  at' 
least,  as  numerous  as  those  of  Luther  j  and  that  they  were; 
prevented  from  explicitly  avowing  themselves  to  be  what 
Dr.  Haweis  calls  Semi-pelagians,  only  during  Luther's  life, 
lest  his  irascible  temper  and  overbearing  spirit  should  excite?, 
such  dissentions  among  them,  as  might  give  advantages  tot 
their  common  enemies. 

Among  the  Calvinistic  churches  enumerated  in  the  same 
chapter,  is  placed  the  church  of  England.  As  our  authot^ 
produces  no  other  proof  than  his  own  assertion^  that  she 
holds  the  doctrine  of  absohite  decreeSy  we  shall  content  our- 
selves at  present  with  opposing  to  it  our  denial;  but  whea 
he  quotes  Bishop  Burnet,  in  support  of  another  positioix 
equally  false,  the  reader  may  perhaps  think  him  entided  to, 
more  attentiois  Speaking  of  the  Puritans  in  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  he  says-— 

"■  Nor  were  they  as  averse  to  the  name  of  bishop  or  his 
superintendance,  as  to  the  pomp,  and  wealth,  and  political 
engagements  of  the  prelacy  :  for  as  yet  the  English  bishops, 
claimed  not  their  office  by  divine  rights  but  under  the  con-. 
stiiutioJi  of  their  country  ;  nor  pleaded  for  more  than  twa 
orders  of  apostolical  appointment,  bishops  and  deacons." 

Has  Dr.  Haweis  never  read  the  Preface  to  the  For7n  of 
ordaining  Bishops^  Priests^  and  Deacons^  published,  by  au- 
thority,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  the  sixth  ?   If  not,  it  is  time 
that  he  should  read  it ;  that  he  may  not  again  oppose  the 
testimony  of  aa  individual  respecting  tlie  doctrinea  of  the 


Review  of  Haweis'  Church  History.  '40S 

^ASrch,  to  the  authoritative  declaration  of  the  church  her- 
self. But  the  declarations  of  the  church  are  by  him  gene- 
^^y  understood  in  a  sense  diametrically  opposite  to  the 
literal  meaning  of  the  words  in  which  they  are  made* 

Thus,  in  the  exhortation  at  the  celebration  of  the  commu- 
niouy  the  church,  by  the  mouth  of  the  priest,  instructs  the 
fseople,  that  "  as  the  benefit  is  great,  if,  with  a  true  penitent 
heart,  and  lively  faith,  we  receive  that  holy  sacrament  (for 
then  we  spiritually  eat  the  flesh  of  Christ,  and  drink  his 
blood  ;  then  we  dwell  in  Christ,  and  Christ  in  us  ;  we  are 
one  with  Christ,   and  Christ  with  us ;)   so  is  the  danger 
gi'eat,  if  we  receive  the  same  unworthily  :   for  then  are  we 
guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  our  Saviour  ;  we  eat 
and  drink  our  own  damnation^  not  considering  the  Lord's 
body,"  &c.     But  our  author,  wishing  to  make  the  church 
in  every  thing  symbolize  with  the  oracle  of  Geneva,  says— ^ 
*'  Calvin  supposed  the  sign  or  symbol  to  convey  a  sacra- 
mental pledge  of  blessing,  and  that  a  spiritual  presence  of 
Christ  attended  it  to  the  regenerate  and  beheving  only; 
whilst  toothers  the  elements  remained  as  common  food:  and 
this  the  Church  of  England  adopted.''^     Whence  it  follows, 
that,  in  his  opinion,  the  Church  of  England  means  by  the 
Word  damnation^  bodily  nourishment ;  for  we  can  hardly 
suppose  that  he  really  intends,  every  time  that  he  sits  down 
to  dinner,  literally  to  "  eat  and  drink  his  ozvn  damnation^  or 
to  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  his  Saviour  !" 

His  account  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  Socinians,  In- 
dependents, and  Anabaptists,  contains  little  that  is  new  or 
exceptionable.  Mention  is,  indeed,  made  of  a  city^  of 
which  we  never  heard  before,  called  Racoxv ;  and  geogra* 
phical  information  we  certainly  did  not  expect  from  a  his- 
tory of  the  church.  We  are  afraid,  however,  that,  by  all 
Other  historians,  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  our  author's  Racow 
IS  called  Cracow^  or  Cracovia;  and  had  he  studied  with 
care  the  works  of  Charles  Leslie,  he  might  have  learned, 
with  other  things  of  more  importance,  tliat  the  Socinian  ca- 


404f  Revietu  Of  Hciweis'  Church  Histofy, 

techism  was  published  m  Cracozv^  though  to  avoid  a  cacb- 
phonic,  it  is  usually  called  the  Racovian  catechism.  This  is 
a  trifling  blunder,  but  it  shows  a  defect  of  that  accuracy, 
without  which  an  historian  can  never  be  trusted. 

His  introduction  to  the  history  of  the  church,  in  the  se- 
venteenth century^  raised  in  our  minds  expectations  which 
the  continued  narrative  did  not  gratify.  The  candour  with 
which  he  judges  of  the  conduct  of  the  Jesuits,  when  acting 
as  Missionaries  in  the  four  quarters  of  the  globe  ;  the  cen- 
sures which  he  deservedly  passes  upon  the  other  orders 
which  thwarted  their  measures  ;  and  the  disinterested  zeal 
by  which  he  allows  many  of  that  learned  and  active. order 
to  have  been  influenced,  led  us  to  hope  for  the  same  impar- 
tiality in  his  account  of  the  reformed  churches,  more  espe- 
cially of  the  church  of  England.  We  were,  however,  woe- 
fully disappointed.  James  the  first  he  finds popishiy  inclined, 
and  his  most  respectable  bishops  impious  Jiatt ever s ;  yet  the 
church  of  Rome  knew  so  little  of  this  inclination,  that,  we 
are  told,  she  meant  to  blow  up  the  monarch  and  his  bishops 
by  gunpowder !  Charles  the  first  leaned  still  more  towards 
Rome,  and  Archbishop  Laud  was  half  a  Papist ;  though  the 
Princess  Elizabeth  has  declared  to  the  world,  that  the  last 
injunction  laid  upon  her  by  her  royal  father,  was  to  study 
the  Archbishop's  book  against  Fisher  the  Jesuit,  which 
would  ground  her  against  popery  ! 

It  is  indeed  known  to  all  who  are  acquainted  with  the 
history  of  that  period,  that  no  man  recovered  so  many  per- 
sons from  the  corruptions  of  popery  as  Dr.  Laud  ;  that  the 
famous  Chillingworth  was  one  of  his  proselytes  ;  and  that, 
of  course,  it  is  to  that  much  calumniated  prelate,  that  the 
world  is  indebted  for  the  ablest  defence  of  the  reformation 
that  ever  "svas  written — we  mean  Chillingworth's  Religion  ' 
of  Protestants^  a  safe  Way  to  Salvation,  The  Archbishop 
'was  indeed  a  hjgh-churchman,  and  discountenanced  the 
docti'ine  oi  absolute  decrees ;  and  the  divine  right  of  episco- 
pacy, Avith  the  universality  of  redemption,  are,  in  our  au- 


Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History,  40S 

thor's  opinion,  the  two  greatest  heresies  that  can  be  main- 
tained by  a  Protestant,  whether  clergyman  or  layman.  They 
are  much  greater  offences  against  God  than  impiety  and  hy- 
pocrisy ;  for,  "  he  hopes  that  Whitgift  and  Bancroft  were 
good  men ^  and  good  bishops,"  though,  in  the  page  immedi- 
ately preceding  that  in  which  this  hope  is  expressed,  he  had 
called  the  former  an  impious  flatterer^  and  the  latter,  a  hy* 
pocrite!  (vol.  iii.  pp.80,  81.) 

What  he  says,  (p.  62)  of  Calixtus,  the  divinity  professor 
of  Helmstadt,  is  much  niore  applicable  to  Laud  : — "  No 
man  appears  a  more  determined  Protestant  than  Laud,  or 
has  written  with  greater  force  against  the  errors  of  the 
church  of  Rome  ;  though  he  was  abused  as  half  a  Catholic, 
because  he  maintained,  that  in  the  church  of  Rome  the  fun- 
damental  articles  were  still  held  ;  and  that  salvation  might 
there  be  obtained,  even  though  men  were  under  many  mis- 
takes and  prejudices  of  education.  He  admitted  that  the 
union  of  churches  was  impracticable,  under  the  decisions  of 
the  council  of  Trent ;"  but  earnestly  wished  that  those  de- 
cisions might  be  altered,  and  Rome  become  such  as  that  he 
could  unite  with  her.  This  surely  was  no  unpardonable  of- 
fence in  the  disciple  of  him,  who,  in  one  of  his  best  prayers 
on  earth,  said,  '*  Holy  Father,  keep  through  thine  own  name 
those  whom  thou  hast  given  me,  that  they  may  be  one  as  we 
are:' 

Dr.  H.  does  not  think  Cromwell  just  equal  to  Charles  the 
first  in  moral  worth  ;  but  "  the  true  religion,"  i.  e.  Calvin- 
ism, "  was  infinitely  more  indebted  to  him  !"  Nay,  we  are 
as  much  indebtecl  to  him  ior  presei'ving  true  religion  among 
us,  as  to  Henry  the  eighth  for  introducing  it !  Was  true  re- 
ligion then  preserved  among  us  by  the  Brownists^  Muggle- 
tonians^  ^lakers^  Fifth-moiiarchy-men^  and  all  the  other 
sects  without  name  and  number,  which  sprang  up  under  the 
protectorate,  and  are  now  mostly  forgotten  t  A  spiritually- 
minded  man,  who,  preferring  the  schism-shop  to  the  cathe- 
dral, wishes,  by  all  possible  means,  to  lessen  episcopal  au- 


406  J^imeto  of  Haweis'*  Church  History^ 

thortty,  may  be  of  this  opinion  ;  but  we  trust  that  the  ma* 
jority  of  "die  nation  think  differently  of  true  religion. 

With  respect  to  the  character  of  Charles  the  second,  we  are 
not  inclined  to  dispute  with  him  ;  but  we  cannot  enough  ad* 
mire  the  effrontery  of  the  man,  who  affirms  that  the  Bishops 
and  other  dignitaries  of  the  church  were  in  that  reign  igno- 
rant, worldly-mmded,  and  negligent  of  their  duty  !  Wer6 
the  Archbishops  Juxon,  Shelden,  and  Sancroft  ignorant,  or 
worldly-minded  men  ?  He  admits  some  merit  in  Kenn^  even 
though  an  Arminian ;  and  be  it  recorded  to  the  honour 
of  Charles,  that  Dr.  Kenn  recommended  himself  to  his  fa- 
vour, not  by  flattering  his  vices,  but  by  reproving  his  mis- 
tress— ^the  fimious  Nell  Gwyn.  Warburton,  though,  in  out 
author's  opinion,  no  better  a  Christian  than  Julian  the  apos- 
tate, was  probably  as  learned  as  Dr.  Haweis  ;  and,  as  he 
was  no  high-churchman,  he  may  be  entitled  to  credit,  when 
he  affirms  of  the  reign  of  Charles  the  second,  not  only  that 
^  it  was^  but  is,  likely  ever  to  be  esteemed  our  golden  age  of 
theological  literature." 

Our  author,  who  finds  not  one  unsullied  virtue  in  the  so- 
vereigns of  the  house  of  Stuart,  discovers  great  generosity 
in  William,  Prince  of  Orange,  when  he  condescended  to  aC' 
cept  of  three  kingdoms  !  Magnanimous  hero  !  He  was  not 
actuated  by  low  ambition,  or  a  desire  to  humble  the  French 
king.  His  only  motive  for  deigning  to  snatch  the  sceptre 
from  the  hands  of  his  uncle  and  father-in-law,  Vv^as  a  desire 
to  preserve  the  profession  of  the  true  religion  in  Great- Bri* 
tain  and  Ireland  !  How  opportunely  was  he  seized  with  that 
Christian  desire  immediately  after  the  birth  of  the  Prince 
of  Wales ; — an  event  which  opened  his  eyes  likewise  to 
another  fact,  which  he  could  not  previously  be  made  to  per* 
eeive  !  James,  and  his  brother  Charles,  had  been  often  ac- 
cused of  extending  the  prerogative,  and  encroaching  on  the 
rights  of  the  people,  and  the  parliament ;  but  William,  as 
lorg  as  he  was  heir-apparent  to  the  throne,  saw  no  necessity- 
for  restraining  the  prerogative.    He  even  said  to  Charles^ 


Meoiew  of  Haweis'  Church  HisUrtf,  405' 

fchat  it  ought  not  to  be  restrained  ;  but  he  now  discovered  his 
mistake,  and  came  over  to  England,  not  merely  to  prevent 
the  establishment  of  popery,  but  to  redress  all  the  grievan-* 
ces  of  the  nation !  Yet  William  was  not  a  faultless  sove- 
reign. He  filled  the  vacant  sees  with  latitudinarian  divines^ 
favouring  Arminianism^  and  some  of  them  even  high,- 
churchmen ! 

Our  learned  historian,  however,  is  mistaken,  when  h^ 
says  that  the  prelates,  who  could  not  transfer  their  allegiance 
Xq  him  from  the  abdicated  Sovereign,  were  deposed.  No 
attempt  was  made  to  depose  them,  if  by  deposition  he  meant 
degradation.  They  were,  indeed,  deprived  of  their  ^^^^  by 
9^  act  of  Parliament;  but  deprivation  of  a  see,  and  deposit 
tion  or  degradation^  are  words  of  very  different  import^ 
tliough  Sir  Richard  Hall  and  he  have  chosen  to  confound 
them.  A  schism,  it  is  true,  was,  by  this  rash  measure, 
introduced  even  among  hi^h-churchmen  ;  but  Sancroft  and 
Tillotson  were  both  bishops,  and  the  adherents  of  neitheie 
looked  upon  the  ordination  of  the  other  as  invalid:  the]^ 
followed  the  example  of  the  council  of  Nice,  which  ac- 
knowledged the  validity  of  the  Novetian  ordinations,  though 
unquestionably  schismatical ;  and  when  a  clergyman  went 
over  from  the  one  party  to  the  other,  he  was  not  re-ordained, 
but  only  required  to  renounce  the  principles  upon  which  the 
schism  was  founded.  Our  reverend  physician's  insinua- 
tions, therefore,  that  the  authority  of  the  regular  clergy  is 
not  more  apostolical  than  that  of  the  self-commissioned 
methodists,  proceeding,  hke  those  of  his  precursor  the 
Baronet,  on  a  confusion  of  ideas,  serve  only  to  evince  how 
little  he  is  acquainted  with  the  constitution  of  the  Catholic 
«hurch,  and  how  desirous  he  is  to  promote  fanaticism  and 
endless  divisions. 

The  history  of  the  eighteenth  century  opens  with  a  high 
penegyric  by  the  author  on  himself;  and  the  object  of  the 
detail  is  to  prove  that  there  is  no  true  Christianity  in  the 
world,  but  among  the  3fgr avians^  the  MethodzstSj  the  Ger- 


Review  of  Haxveis*  Church  History* 

inan  Pietists^  and  the  various  sects  of  Scottish  Seceders^  who 
are,  indeed,  such  genuine  gospellers^  that  they  have  pub- 
liclv  renounced  some  of  the  first  principles  of  moral  recti- 
tude.* The  Lutheran  churches  have  all  deviated  from  the 
opinions  of  their  founder  respecting  particular  redemption 
5ind  absolute  decrees  ;  and  Dr.  Haweis,  who  holds  these  opi- 
nions, has  too  good  reason  to  value  his  own  understanding 
and  progress  in  godliness,  to  look  upon  their  universal  apos- 
tacy  as  a  ground  oi  probability^  if  not  ^  proof ^  that  Luther, 
on  these  points,  had  not  discovered  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus  ! 

Much  undeserved  abuse,  we  believe,  has  been  poured 
upon  the  Moravians ;  but  we  cannot  pay  great  regard  to 
our  author's  account  of  their  church  and  doctrines,  because 
it  omits  several  things  of  importance  to  be  known,  and  con- 
tains some  assertions,  which  we  have  good  reason  to  consi- 
der as  false.  An  episcopal  succession  is  indeed  a  matter  of 
too  little  importance  to  be  noticed  by  our  spiritually -minded 
man  ;  but  there  are  readers  of  our  journal,  who  will  receive 
pleasure  from  the  information  that  Archbishop  Potter,  after 
the  most  diligent  research  into  the  histor37^  of  the  church  of 
the  united  brethren,  admitted  the  succession  of  their  bishops 
to  have  been  uninterrupted,  and  considered  them  as  aso- 
ciety  of  Christians  deserving  of  the  right  hand  of  fellowship. 
Our  author  affirms,  that  Count  Zinzendorff,  "  though  he 
consented,  with  Baron  Watteville,  to  be  appointed  to  the 
presidence  of  the  brethren's  affairs,  both  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral, in  conjunction  with  the  elders  of  the  congregation, 
yet  continued  in  communion  with  the  Luthern  church  to 
his  dying  day  !" 

This  is  a  tale,  in  itself,  exceedingly  improbable.  The 
united  brethren,  at  that  period,  if  not  now,  considered  epis- 
copal ordination  as  necessary  to  qualify  the  servants  of  the 
church  for  their  respective  functions  ;  and  it  is  little  likely 

*  See  cur  eighth  volume,  p.  134 


Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History,  409 

that  they  would  appoint  a  layman  of  a  different  communion 
to  preside  over  their  bishops  and  presbyters.  But  we  need 
not  reason  in  this  manner.  We  have  the  authority  of  one 
of  their  own  clergv  to  affirm,  that  Count  Zinzendorff, 
after  endeavouring  in  vain  to  bring  over  the  brethren  at 
Hemheet  to  the  Lutheran  faith  and  discipline,  became 
himself  a  convert  to  their  faith  and  discipline,  and,  in  1735, 
was  consecrated  one  of  their  bishops ;  having,  the  year  be- 
fore, been  examined,  and  admitted  into  the  inferior  orders 
by  the  theological  faculty  at  Tubingen.  Archbishop  Potter, 
we  are  assured,  congratulated  him  on  the  event,  and  pro- 
mised what  assistance  he  could  give  to  a  church  of  confes- 
sors, of  whom  he  wrote  in  terms  of  the  highest  respect,  for 
their  having  maintained  the  pure  and  primitive  faith  and 
discipline,  in  the  midst  of  the  most  tedious  and  cruel  per* 
aecutions. 

We  have  reason  to  believe,  from  the  detail  given  us  by 
the  same  candid  Moravian,  that  the  charge  of  impurity 
brought  against  the  count  by  the  ti*anslator  of  Mosheim's 
history,  and  the  Bishops  Warburton  and  Lavington,  is  not 
so  totally  groundless  as  our  author  wishes  to  persuade  his 
readers.  The  count,  indeed,  was  innocent ;  but  it  is  ad- 
mitted by  our  correspondent,  that  some  of  the  converts  to 
the  faith  and  discipline  of  the  unitas  fratrum^  having  pre- 
viously imbibed  extravagant  notions,  propagated  them  with 
zeal  among  their  new  friends,  in  a  phraseology  extremely 
reprehensible;  and  that  the  count  himself  sometimes  adopted 
the  very  improper  language  of  those  fanatics,  when  labour- 
ing to  bring  them  from  the  extravagance  of  error  to  the 
soberness  of  truth.  It  is  added,  that  much  of  the  extra- 
vagance and  error,  which  have  been  attributed  to  the  count, 
is  to  be  charged,  not  to  him^  but  to  those  persons  who, 
writing  his  extempore  sermons  in  short-hand,  printed  and 
published  them  without  his  knowledge  or  consent. 

This  account  of  the  matter  is  extremely  probable ;  and 
while,  it  may  ser\^e  to  vindicate  these  respectable  characters 


410  Review  of  Haweis*  Church  History^ 

from  one  of  the  blackest  calumnies  that  were  ever  circu- 
lated against  men,^  it  shows  that  Count  Zinzendorff  and 
the  brethren  gave  no  countenance  to  those  impurities, 
which,  on  plausible  evidence,  were  said  to  disgrace  their 
society.  They  have  departed,  however,  far  from  the  ori- 
ginal purity  of  their  principles,  if  they  be  amalgamated 
ivith  that  mass  of  mushrooms  sprung  from  the  hot-bed  o£ 
fanaticism,  and  ycleped  the  Missionary  Society* 

The  three  apostles  of  methodism  were  Mr.  John  Wes- 
ley, Mr.  George  Whitfield,  and  "  the  noble  and  elect 
Lady  Huntingdon."  We  have  a  full  account  of  the  birtli, 
life,  and  transactions  of  each  of  these  servants  of  the  Lord, 
and  revivers  of  true  godliness ;  and  it  may  seem  rather  sin- 
gular, that,  though  Wesley  was  as  zealous  an  opponent  of 
Calvinism  as  any  of  those  dignitaries  of  the  church,  whom 
our  author  calls  Semi-pelagians,  he  is  yet  admitttid  to  have 
been  •"'  an  eminently  favoured  saint  of  God."  But  he  had 
the  merit  of  exciting  a  schism  in  the  established  church, 
which,  like  charity,  covereth  a  multitude  of  sins. 

Whitfield  had  all  Wesley's  zeal,  with  the  additional  me- 
rit of  Calvinistic  orthoxy,  and  little  learning'  /  Hence  it 
is,  that  "  no  man^  since  the  days  of  St.  Paul,  not  even  Lu- 
ther himself,  was  ever  personally  blest  to  the  call  and  con- 
version of  so  many  souls  from  darkness  to  light,  and  from 
the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  as  George  Whitfield.    He 

*  "  I  am  informed,"  says  our  candid  author,  ««  that  the  impure  and 
malignant  note  inserted  by  the  translator  of  Mosheim,  against  tbc 
brethren,  in  his  ecclesiastical  history,  he  would,  from  conviction  of'  its  in- 
justice, have  expunged:  but  the  copy  being  shown  to  the  author  of  tJb& 
divine  Legation  of  Moses,  the  bishop  engaged  him  to  let  it  stand,  and 
there  it  remains  a  monument  of  the  bitterness,  bigotry,  and  falsehood  of 
these  accusers  of  the  brethren"  It  would  have  been  singularly  obliging 
in  our  impartial  historian,  to  have  saidyrow  vihom  he  received  this  curi- 
ous piece  of  informarion !  The  bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Dr.  Maclaine 
•were  no  fools.  They  could  not  but  be  sensible  that,  if  real,  this  was  a 
most  nefarious  transaction  ;  and  it  is  not  probable  that  they  would  first 
coinmit  a  crijne,  and  then  publish  that  crime  to  defeat  its  olyect,  and  fi'w.- 
grace  themselves/ 


Jfeview  of  Haweis*  Church  History »  411 

crossed  the  Atlantic  thirteen  times,  to  preach  the  everlast- 
ing gospel,  xuith  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  sent  doxvn front 
Heaven  /" 

But  though  no  man^  since  the  days  of  St»  Paul,  has  been 
so  personally  blest  as  St.  George  Whitfeld^  yet  the  elect  lady 
seems  to  have  been  still  more  blest ;  for  she  founded  col- 
leges, endowed  innumerable  chapels,  and  patronized  Dr, 
Hazveis  !  There  are  several  curious  particulars  in  our  au- 
thor's account  of  this  lady,  which  we  regret  that  our  limits 
permit  us  not  to  transcribe ;  but  we  cannot  omit  the  follow- 
ing, as  it  shows  the  real  object  of  some  of  the  Methodists 
in  "  creeping  into  houses,  and  leading  captive  silly  women, 
led  away  by  divers  lusts,"  whilst  it  verifies  an  observation 
of  the  pious  Nelson,  that  "  love  between  the  sexes,  though 
it  may  begin  in  the  spirit,  generally  ends  in  the  flesh." 

Lady  Huntingdon,  though  exemplary  in  her  conduct 
from  a  child,  wished,  till  some  time  after  her  marriage,  to 
establish  her  own  righteousness,  and  "  hy  prayer,  fasting, 
and  alms-deeds,  to  commend  herself  to  the  favour  of  the 
Most  High  and  Most  Holy !  The  zealous  preachers,  who 
had  been  branded  with  the  name  of  Methodists,  had  now 
awakened  great  attention  in  the  land.  Lady  Margaret  Hast- 
ings happening  to  hear  them,  received  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus  from  their  ministry;  and  was,  some  years  after, 
united  in  marriage  with  the  excellent  Mr,  Ingham,  one  of 
the  first  labourers  in  this  plenteous  harvest !  Conversing 
with  Lady  Margaret  one  day  on  this  subject,  Lady  Hun- 
tingdon was  exceedingly  struck  with  a  sentiment  she  ut- 
tered, that  since  she  had  known  and  believed  in  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  for  life  and  salvation,  she  had  been  as  happy 
as  an  angel  !\  To  any  such  sensation  of  happiness,  Lady 
Huntingdon  felt  that  she  was  yet  a  stranger  !"  She  obtained 
that  happiness,  however,  from  her  connection  with  Mr<x 
Whitfield,  and  prophesied  to  Bishop  Benson,  that,  on  his 
death-bed,  "  the  ordination  of  George  Whitfield  would  be 
one  of  the  few  ordinations  on  which  he  would  reflect  with 


41^  i^eview  df  llaweti  Church  HiHoYy^. 

complacence."—"  It  is  worthy  of  remark,"  adds  the  author,. 
"  that  Bishop  Benson,  on  his  dying  bed,  sent  ten  guineas 
to  Mr.  Whitfield,  as  a  token  of  his  favour  and  approbation^ 
and  begged  to  be  remembered  by  him  in  his  prayers !" 

Yet  this  prophetess,  this  genuine  Calvinist,  this  elect  ladtf^ 
is  represented  by  her  panegyrist,  as  having  her  heart  swollen 
ivith  spiritual  pride,  as  "  thinking  of  herself  much  more 
highly  than  she  ought  to  have  thought,  and  not  soberly, 
according  as  God  had  dealt  to  her  and  her  friends  the  mea- 
sure of  faith."^  "  The  success  attending  her  efforts  seemed 
to  impress  her  mind  with  a  persuasion,  that  a  particular 
benediction  would  rest  upon  whomsoever  she  should  send 
forth  ;f  and  rendered  her  choice  not  always  judicious !  She 
had  so  long  directed  the  procedures  of  her  connection^  that 
she  too  seldom  asked  the  advice  of  the  judicious  ministei"s 
who  laboured  with  her ;  and  bore  not  passively  contradic- 
tion,^ This,  we  suppose,  is  related  to  prove  the  truth  of 
Luther's    opinion,      that    Calviniam    tends    to    humble    the 

human  heart ;  and  many  such  proofs  the  reader  will  find 
in  our  author's  account  of  himself,  and  his  brethren  of  the 
connection  ! 

Thus,  "  Whitfield  too  frequently  indulged  in  censures  of 
the  clergy,  which,  however  just  they  might  be,  seemed  the 
effect  of  resentment !" — "  He,  and  Wesley,  and  all  of  them^ 
were  always  at  their  work,  preaching  wherever  they  could 
procure  admittance  into  the  churches  ;  and  not  a  little  Jiat" 
teredbij  the  popularity  attending  their  ministrations  !  They 
must  have  been  more  than  men  (they  were  the  elec£)  if  they 
had  not  been  so."  "  The  Methodists"  (remember,  reader, 
he  is  a  Methodist  who  is  speaking)  "  live  in  a  state  of 
greater  piety  and  separation  from  the  zvo  rid  than  the  gene- 
rality of  their  brethren.    They  join  in  noiae  of  the  fashion  - 


*  Rom.  xli.  S. 

f  We  now  see  the  propriety  of  our  author's  phrase,  "  Episcopal  mer.," 
which  appeared  to  us  so  strange  when  we  first  met  with  it. 


K^iew  of  Hawets*  Church  History,  313 

ad^le  amusements  of  the  age,  frequent  not  the  theatres,  or  < 
scenes  of  dissipation,  court  no  favour  of  the  great,  or  human 
respects  ;  their  tiine  and  services  are  better  employed  in  the 
more  important  labours  of  the  ministry,  preaching  the  word 
in  season,  out  of  season,  and  counting  their  work  their  best 
rvagesP'' 

We  have  some  reason  to  believe  that  all  Calvinistic  Me- 
thodists liave  not  been  so  disinterested.  One  of  them,  said 
to  be  of  the  elect  ladj^'s  connection^  agreed  to  hold  a  rich 
rectory  for  a  minor,  but  refused  to  resign  it  when  the  minor, 
became  of  age,  because  he  had  discovered  that  the  transac- 
tion was  simoniacal  and  illegal.  Simoniacal  and  illegal  it 
certainly  was  ;  but  had  the  rector  possessed  the  spirit  of  our 
author,  he  would  have  contrived  to  fulfil  his  engagement, 
ivhile  he  prevented  the  simony.  He  would  have  paid  the 
tithes  to  the  man  in  whose  favour  he  had  promised  to  re- 
sign the  living  ;  but,  "  counting  his  work  his  best  wages," 
he  would  have  continued  his  pastoral  relntlnn  to  the  parish 
for  the  sake  of  the  souls  entrusted  to  his  care.  Such,  we 
cannot  doubt,  would  have  been  the  conduct  of  Dr.  Haweis, 
if  he  had  been  so  unfortunate  as  to  enter  into  a  simoniacal 
contract  for  the  living  of  All-Samts,  Aldwinckle  ! 

Through  the  last  volume  of  this  work,  the  author  em- 
braces every  opportunity  of  expatiating  on  the  Christian 
zeal  oithe  London  Missionary  Society^  and  pronounces  that 
society  to  be  "  certainly  of  God."  We  cannot  help  being 
<ef  a  different  opinion.  The  Doctor  and  his  associates  may 
each  be  actuated  by  a  disinterested  desire  to  carry  the  light 
of  the  glorious  gospel  into  the  regions  of  the  shadow  of 
death ;  but  it  would  not  be  easy  to  persuade  us  that  God  is 
the  author  of  confusion^  or.  that  the  doctrines  of  Christianity 
will  be  successfully  preacaed  among  the  heathen  by  men, 
not  only  running  unsent,  but  differing  so  widely  in  opinion 
as  Calvinists  and  Arminians,  Episcopalians  and  Presbyte- 
rians, Paedo-baptists  and  Anti-paedo-baptists ! 

In  vain  may  the  society  direct  its  Missionaries  to  abstain 


414  Review  of  Hawets*  Church  History* 

from  controversy,  and  preach  nothing  to  the  heathen  but  the 
essential  doctrines  and  duties  of  the  gospel.  The  Mission- 
aries are  not  agreed  among  themselves  what  doctrines  an,d 
duties  are  essential.  One  thinks  the  distinguishing  tenets  o)F 
Calvinism  the  most  essential  parts  of  gospel  truth ;  another 
discovers  in  those  tenets,  a  series  of  the  most  shocking  blas- 
phemies ;  whilst  a  third,  admitting  their  truth,  sees  no  pro- 
priety of  inculcating  them  on  the  minds  of  the  people.  One 
Missionary  discovers  in  the  New-Testament,  that  the  in- 
fant children  of  believing  parents  should  be  admitted  into 
the  church  by  the  sacrament  of  baptism  ;  whilst  another  is 
persuaded,  that  no  person  is  a  subject  of  Christian  baptism, 
who  does  not  actually  believe  the  gospel.  The  indepen- 
dent, considering  the  rights  of  Christians  as  common,  feels 
himself  bound  to  "  stand  fast  in  the  liberty  with  which 
Christ  hath  made  him  free  ;"  but  the  Episcopalian  and  Pres- 
byterian believe  that  a  ministry,  with  xhQ  power  of  the  keys^ 
or  the  exclusive  right  of  itdiiiinistciliig  the  sacraments,  is 
the  ordinance  of  Christ,  to  which  the  multitude  of  believers 
are  bound  to  pay  obedience ;  whilst  they  differ  exceedingly  as 
to  the  constitution  of  the  church,  and  the  channel  through 
which  the  power  of  the  keys  must  be  derived.  Among  such 
heterogeneous  missionaries,  preaching  the  gospel  to  the 
same  people,  controversies  seem  to  be  inevitable  ;  and  their 
labours,  instead  of  enlightening  the  heathen,  will  only  in- 
crease their  prejudices  against  the  faith,  whenever  it  shall  be 
carried  to  them  in  a  more  regular  manner. 

In  a  word,  the  Missionary  Society,  like  this  history  of 
the  church,  can  do  no  good,  and  may  be  productive  of  much 
evil.  With  this  conviction  on  our  minds,  we  dare  not  re- 
commend either  the  one  or  the  other  to  the  public  favour  ; 
but  we  readily  admit,  that  to  preach  the  gospel  among  the 
heathen  is  the  duty  of  the  church,  and  that  an  ecclesiastical 
history,  really  impartial  and  authenticated  by  proper  refer-  . 
ences  to  original  authorities,  is  a  desideratum  in  English 
literature. 


INDEX 


A  Page. 

BEL's  saci-lfice — why  accepted  32 

Abraham — called  to  be  the  father  of  the  church  of  the  Hebrews  37 

— ■        — trial  of  his  faith,  39 

Acts  of  the  Apostles  quoted — for  the  sense  of  sTi  to  au1o  193 

Aerius — the  heretic — the  first  opposer  of  Episcopacy  208 

Ananias — a  disciple — how  employed  to  baptize  Paul  123 

Anderson  of  Dunbarton — followed  by  Dr.  Campbell  107,  130 

-— — ^ again  quoted,  137,  144 

■■  agrees  with  the  church  of  Rome  152 

Angels  of  the  seven  churches  of  Asia  153 

— supposed  by  Dr.  Campbell  to  be  moderators  153,  157 

..  proved  to  be  bishops  I54 

Anti-Jacobin  Review  quoted  114,  120,  133,  192 

Apostles  of  Christ— when  and  how  commissioned  9,  95,  97 

^tt  first  in  the  church  98 

■    ■        in  what  their  extraordinary  character  consisted     146 

"  — —  reasons  for  their  not  having  successors  consi- 

dered 145,  152 

when  the  title  was  laid  aside  I49 

how  their  Episcopal  office  has  been  continued        150 

all  modelled  the  church  on  the  same  plan  160 


Articles  XXIII.  and  XXXVI.  of  the  church  of  England  considered .  129 

Baptism,  one  of  the  terms  or  conditions  of  salvation  119 

administration  of  it — an  essential  part  of  the  apostolic  com- 
mission 145 

Bellarmine — Cardinal — denied  that  the  apostles  had  successors  152 

Beza — quoted  as  favourable  to  Episcopacy  250 

Bingham — misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  157 

his  authority  for  voc^oi-Kia,  being  used  for  a  diocese  234 

Bishops— how  successors  of  the  Apostles  100 

college  of— in  Scotland  were  duly  consecrated,  291 

• —  soon  became  diocesan  297 

Bishops  ill  ScQtJand— how  elected  298 


416  INDEX. 

Bishops,  priests  and  deacons,  expressly  distingiiished  by  the  church 

of  England  PagelSl 

Blondel  quoted  162 

acknowledges  Polycarp's  Episcopal  character  166 

his  Apology  for  the  Opinion  of  Jerome  220 

--  '         how  the  conclusion  of  that  apology  was  suppressed  251 

Book  of  consecration,  &c.  of  the  church  of  England  quoted  130 

Boucher,  Rev.  Jonathan,  quoted  on  the  American  episcopate      299,  300 
Bow,  in  the  cloud,  a  token  of  God's  covenant  37 

Brett,  Dr.  his  Divine  Right  of  Episcopacy  quoted  131 

Burn's  Ecclesiastical  Laiv  quoted  234 

Butler's  Analogy,  &c.  quoted  84 

Cain's  sacrifice — why  rejected  33 

Calvin,  quoted  on  Timothy's  ordination  140 

'    ■  quoted  as  favourable  to  Episcopacy  249 

Campbell,  Dr. — his  lectures  on  ecclesiastical  history  83,  335 

— — for  what  purpose  these  lectures  were  published  338 

■  ■ his  opinion  of  church  government  85 

■'  .      ...  and  of  the  difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  form  of  it       86 

"  his  severity  against  priestly  pride  105 

I his  lectures  said  to  he  prepared  by  himself  for  the 

press  106 

< ■  his  Dissertation  on  Miracles  quoted  ibid 

his  account  of  the  plan  and  purpose  of  his  lectures     108 

— — ■  his  misrepresentation  of  the  church  of  England  116, 129 

his  reference  to  the  test  as  a  coarse  implement  117 

his  opinion  respecting  the  terms  of  the  gospel  cove- 
nant 119 

-    '  his  account  of  Philip  the  deacon  121 

'   ■ his  popular  claim  receives  no  countenance  from  the 

conversion  of  Cornelius  123 

— — .  his  account  of  the  office  of  evangelists  144 

his  description  of  the  apostolic  character  145,  146,  148, 


149,  150 


■     •■• his  account  of  the  angels  of  the  seven  churches  153 

his  opinion  of  the  testimony  of  the  fathers  161 

■  his  misrepresentation  of  Clemens  Romanus        162,  165 

_— his  objections  to  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  160,  173 

his  description  of  parochial  Episcopacy       183,  184,  188 

his  account  of  church  unity  195,  196 

■ — ^ — —  his  Translation  of  the  Gospels  quoted  196 

his  parochial  Episcopacy  incompatible  with  that  of 

Jerusalem  200 

-— — — his  opinion  vrith  respect  to  the  nov/cr  of  ordination    204 


INDEX.  41? 

Gampbell,  Dr. — his  misrepi-esentation  of  Hilavy  the  deacon        page  219 
■" his  account  of  Jerome's  Alexandrian  custom     221,  222 

— — his  opinion  respecting  the  rise  of  Episcopal  superi- 
ority 231 

■    ■    ■  his  distinction  between  parochial  and  diocesan  Epis- 

copacy 23G 

— — his  reflection  on  the  Scotch  Episcopalians  267,  268 

— — his  opinion  of  ordination,  as  an  appointment  to  a 

particular  charge  268,  269,  271 

_— his  attack  on  the  orders  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal 

church  275,  278 

-  — — — .  he  allows  the  nonjurors  to  have  a  sort  of  presbyte- 

rian  ordination  302 

-"  ■ — —  his  absurd  reasoning  on  that  subject  303,  305 


his  arginnenttim  ad  bo')ninuni  retoned  on  himself  407, 410 

— ■        his  character  and  disposition  336 

— — -  his  account  of  Gibbon's  History ^  &c.  339 


Chalcedon — general  council — referred  to  by  Dr.  Campbell  280 

•' the  purpose  for  which  it  was  held  281 

Charisma — or  gift — in  Timothy — what?  273 

Charity — truly  Christian,  described  334 

Cherubim — mystical  figures  30 

Christianity — to  be  ennbraced  as  represented  in  scripture  27 

'     ■  the  accomplishment  of  God's  etefnal  putpose  28 

Church — Essay  on  it  by  Jones,  quoted  11,  101 

— — mistakes  with  regard  to  it  10,  20,  109 

■        how  represented  in  scripture  21,  22,  328 — o30 

— — particular  persons  set  apart  for  its  service  93 

— — — —  its  form  of  government  sufficiently  ascertained  104 

Claim  of  right — set  up  at  the  revolution  134,  265 

Clemens  Romanus — his  first  episde  to  the  Corinthians  quoted  162 

■ his  allusion  to  the  Jev/ish,  in  describing  the  Chris- 
tian ministry  162 
Clement  of  Alexandria  misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  181 

■•    '         —  quoted  in  favour  of  Episcopacy  182 

Clerc,  Mr.  Le^ — quoted  for  and  against  Episcopacy  251,  252 

• his  argument  against  it — dangerous  to  Christianity   252,254- 

Clergy  and  laity — the  distinction  opposed  by  Dr.  Campbell  105 

College  of  bishops  in  Scotland — duly  consecrated  291,  292 

CoUuthus,  a  presbyter,  censured  for  pretending  to  ordain  208 

Congregation  used  instead  of  church  130 

Congregational  authority  supported  by  Dr.  Campbell  111 

■  •   '        — -^ —  not  supported  by  St.  Pjiul  114 

Cornelius — his  conversion  121 

Cumberland,  Richard — quoted  .62 

Cyprian-^misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  pZ^  197,  210,  211 

53 


428  INDEX. 

Cypvian— describes  admirably  the  unity  of  the  Episcopate  page  15^ 
supports  the  authority  of  bishops  211 — 216 

his  account  of  the  Episcopal  college  274 

Daubeny,  Rev.  Charles — his  just  account  of  sacrifice  49 

-  ■     — ^ ■- — ■'  his  Guide  to  the  Church  quoted  94 

— —  his  Preliminary  Discourse  quoted  184 

— the  Appendiyi  of  his  Guide  to  the  C/jMrc-6  quoted  226 

r.  his  Eight  Discourses  quoted  313 

— ——  his  opinion  of  such  nonjurors  as  Dodwell 

and  Hieks,  Leslie  and  Law  314 

Deacons — set  thirdly  in  the  church  99 

r)ioc€san  Episcopacy  of  Scotland  297 

'Disciples — seventy — how  employed  95 

Divine  right — claimed  by  Presbyterians  as  well  as  Episcopalians  137 

Divisions  among  Christians  hurtful  to  Christianity  10 

Dodwell  unfairly  attacked  by  Dr.  Campbell                            306,  311,  323 

Dbdwellians — an  epithet  tised  by  Anderson  and  Dr.  Campbell  311 

Economy  of  grace — not  to  be  altered  16 

Ellis,  Dr. — his  Knoivledge  of  Divine  Things,  Sec.  recommended  60 

England,  church  of — misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  116,  129 

-                                 her  ordination  offices  quoted  285 

Inquiry  info  the  Constitution,  iJJfc  of  the  Primitive  Church  183 

-_ followed  by  Dr.  Campbell  184,  193 

Enthusiasm— the  folly  and  danger  of  it  20 

Enthusiasts  boast  of  the  assurance  of  faith  17 

Episcopacy — origin  of  it  not  founded  on  names,  but  things  158 

— * primitive — how  described  by  Dr.  Campbell  230 

was  never  a  new  thing  in  the  church  241  r  242 

-^ —  the  only  form  of  church  government  for  fifteen  hundred 

years  261 

— —abolished  by  the  parliament  of  Scotland  in'  11689  265 

Episcopal  reformed  church  of  Scotland  misrepresented  hy  Dr.  Camp- 
bell 13- 

--' government  of  the  church  of  Scotland  agreeable  to  the 

word  of  God  135 

Episcopal  superiority — how  accounted  for  by  Dr.  Campbell  236,  239 

Episcopal  character — how  exposed  to  persecution  257 

Episcopal  succession — regularity  of  it  easily  proved  245 

■■         ■■■•  ■■  no  reason  to  believe  tliat  it  has  failed  245,  247 

-— ' — —  how  carried  on  in  England  262 

' — - — —  how  transmitted  to  Scotland  263 

—I .'    »  how  continued  in  Scotland  266 

Episcopalians  of  Scotland — not  separatists  from  the  church  18 

loyal  subjects  317,  321 

why  separated  from  the  establishment         321 

Episcopate— one— described  by  Cyprian  275 


INDEX.  419 

Evangelists — Timothy  and  Titus  considered  as  such  page  144 

Eusebius  quoted  202 

Eutychius— Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  referred  to  by  Dr.  Campbell      225  . 
Faith— once  del  vered  to  the  saints,  to  be  contended  for  71 

delivered  :n  ^forin  of  sound  ivords  73 

I  built  on  a  firm  and  solid  foundation  74 

Fathers — their  testimony  appealed  to  161,  256 

Firmilian — his  letter  to  Cyprian  considered  209 

First  born — how  types  of  Christ,  under  the  patriarchial  economy  94 

Forbes — Lord  President,  quoted  29,  31 

Free-thinkers — boast  of  superior  wisdom  15 

their  wild  and  foolish  opinions  68 

Gibbon — the  historian — coincidence  between  him  and  Dr.  Campbell    201 

his  strange  account  of  Cyprian  218 

— — —  his  opinion  of  primitive  bishops  230 

highly  applauded  by  Dr.  Campbell  338 

Gregory  Nyssen  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell  and  Gibbon  201 

Heretics— ancient — could  show  no  regular  succession  of  bishops  230 

Hicks,  Dr. — misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  313 

Hierarchy  opposed  by  Gibbon  and  Dr.  Campbell  33d 

High-church  applied  by  Dr.  Campbell  to  Cyprian  196 

. designed  as  a  contemptuous  epithet  217 

properly  described  by  bishop  Horsely  334i 

Hillary  tlie  deacon,  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell  126,  218 

Jerome's  opinion  of  him  126 

says  expressly  that  Epaphroditus  was  an  apostle  151 

Hooker — his  Ecclesiastical  Polity  quoted  282,  284 

Home,  Bishop — his  opinion  of  the  Scotch  Episcopalians  307 

Horsely,  Bishop — his  opinion  of  the  Scotch  Episcopacy  289 

his  charge  to  the  clergy  of  St.  David's  quoted  235 

Hosea — Bishop  Horsely 's  translation  quoted  42 

Jacob's  ladder  41 

■ his  name  changed  to  Israel  ibid 

James  the  Just,  bishop  of  Jerusalem  187,  188 

Jerome — quoted  on  the  succession  of  apostles  141 

— —  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell  221 

.: — ,  not  hostile  to  Episcopacy  222,  226,  228 

—  quotations  from  him  in  favour  of  Episcopacy  226 — 228 

•= his  testimony  not  to  be  opposed  to  that  of  the  earlier  fathers  229 

Jerusalem — church  of— contained  many  thousands  of  believers    189 — 191 
Jev^ish  dispensation  typical  of  the  Christian  94 

Ignatius — account  of  him  as  bishop  of  Antioch  167 

his  genuine  epistles  published  by  Usher  and  Vossius  168 

— — vindication  of  these  epistles  170 — 174 

— his  epistles  clearly  iiiovY  the  threQ  distinct  orders  of  bishops, 

•presbyters  and  deacoiiS  175—177 


425  INDEK. 

Ignatiua'f^what  he  means  by  "  one  altar  as  but  one  bishop"        page  19S 

Itlumiiiati — modern— like  the  sadducees  of  old  1$ 

Jones,  Rev.  William— his  £ssqy  on  the  Church  quoted  11,  101 

-mmm ■..     .  his  account  of  schism  331 — 333 

Irenaeus  quoted  28 

■'■'^          misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  178 

'^i— =^ quoted  in  favour  of  Episcopacy  179,  180 

Isaac — the  type  or  representative  of  the  promised  seed  40 

Israel — twelve  tribes  of— their  wonderful  history  43 

Justin  Martyr's  use  of  the  phrase  s'T;  to  avlo  192 

Kingdom  of  Christ — how  established  90 

-^ , ■    .  ,       its  government  not  to  be  altered  90 — 92 

■ ..  -,.. .    jx      how  it  diifers  from  the  kingdoms  of  this  world   92 

Law,  Rev.  Mr.  his  arguments  in  support  of  the  Episcopal  succession  24Q 

.4-., his  letters  to  Bishop  Hoadly  227 

Layman's  account  of  his  faith  and  practice  7^ 

Leslie,  Rev.  Charles,  quoted  248 

-~— -—- — ).  .  ■              account  of  him  by  Bishop  Horns  314 

Liberality  of  mind — how  it  ought  to  be  shown  23,  24 

Melchizedeck — blessed  Abraham  38 

Ministry — Christian  must  have  a  valid  commission  77—79 

Missionaries — their  contempt  of  a  regular  tnission  18 

Monro,  Dr. — his  account  of  Blondel's  apology  220 

Moses — law  cf — fulfilled  45 

•-. —  a  schoolmaster  unto  Christ  4,7 

— , predicted  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  52,  5^ 

Natural  rehgion — what  ?  58,  59 

folly  of  opposing  it  to  revelation  60 

— — mistakes  with  respect  to  it  64,  65 

Neocesaraea — diocese  of— mentioned  by  Dr.  Campbell  and  Gibbon       201 

New  philosophy — effects  of  it  15 

Noah — warned  of  God,  prepared  the  ark  35 

■■■■           God's  covenant  established  with  him  36 

Nonjurors — Scotch— misrepresented  135 

"-- —  their  disaffection  accounted  for  317 

■  ■  ^     -    ■■■■        Scotch  Episcopalians  ought  not  to  be  branded 

as  such  317 

Norwich — late  bishop  of,  quoted  21,  70,  75 

Old  paths — how  to  be  asked  for  87,  102 

Old  Testament  not  contrary  to  the  New  53 — S5 

Ordination  by  Presbyters  prohibited  205,  207 

: not  an  appointment  to  a  particular  charge  272 

'. offices  of  the  church  of  England  285 

adopted  by  the  Scotch  Episcopal  church  286 

Original  Draught  of  the  Frimiti'je  Chitrc/^  quoted  198 

Paley,  Archdeacon,  quoted  58 


INDEX.  431 

PjU"ish— how  ap])lled  in  the  primitive  church  page  18S 

Parochial  Episcopacy  described  by  Dr.  Campbell  183 — 135 

— its  supposed  resembilq.nce  to  some  highland 

parishes  in  Scotland  199 

Parkhurst's  Greek  Lexicon  quoted  186 

Philip,  ihe  deacon — his  baptizing  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  121 

Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna — misinterpreted  by  Dr.  Campbell  166 

Popery  and  presbyter) — not  unlike  in  many  things  152 

Potter,  Archbishop — distinguishes  becween  the  ordination  of  minis- 
ters, and  their  appointment  to  a  charge  285 
Pi-edecessors — ecclesiastical — how  considered  by  the  Scotch  Episco- 
palians 136 
Prelacy  applied  by  Dr.  Campbell  to  diocesan  Episcopacy  235 
Presbyters  or  elders  set  secondarily  .n  the  church  9^ 
Presbytery — how  employed  in  ordaining  Timothy  140 
■    .    '              change  of  it  into  diocesan  Episcopacy  impossible               238 

this  proved  by  Dr  Jeremy  Taylor  S42— 244 

Prideaux,  Dr. — quoted  on  the  spiritual  power  of  bishops  288 

Priesthood — Cliristian  76,  254 

■  ■■    -   orders  of  it  under  the  gospel  104 

Prophecy,  language  of — from  the  bcgaining  of  the  world  51 

Reason — not  to  be  opposed  to  revelation  60 — 62,  66 

Reformation  of  religion — what — and  how  to  be  carried  on  69 

-■  »■  ■  ' did  not  make  a  nev)  church  262 

Reformers— foreign — not  hostile  to  Episcopacy  248 

Religion — importance  of  it  9 

■«— — patriarchal,  Jewish  and  Christian,  all  point  to  the  same  object  55 

Restoration  of  Charles  II.  and  of  Episcopacy  263 

'Revelation  the  only  source  of  religious  knowledge  63 — 67 

Revolutions  not  effected  without  some  noise  241 

Rome,  church  of — retained  the  Episcopal  succession  261 

Sacrifice — a  divine  institution  o2,  48 

— — of  Cain  and  Abel'^  32 

-— —  carefully  observed  by  the  primitive  worshippers  34 

Sage,  Bishop — his  Principles  of  the  Cyprianic  Age  216 

Schism — Dr.  Campbell's  opinion  of  it  323 

true  account  of  it  330 

— — —  accurately  described  by  Mr.  Jones  331 — 333 

Scotch  Episcopal  church  vindicated  259,  317,  321 

believes  agreeably  to  the  21st  article  of  the 

church  of  England  281 
-^ — —  its  bishops  ejected  at  the  revolution,  conti- 
nued real  bishops                                                                                      266 

and  had  people  under  their  spiritual  care  287,  290 

uses  the  ordination  offices  of  the  church  of 


EnglamJ  286 


4iJ2  INDEX. 

Scotch  Episcopalians — loyal  subjects  page  317,  SaO 

why  they  separate  from  the  establishment  321 

Scotland— moral  and  religious  state  of  it  13 — 15 

Seabury,  Bishop — consecrated  in  Scotland  301 

. assisted  at  the  consecration  of  Dr.  Clagget  of  Ma- 
ryland ibid 
Seeker,  Archbishop— his  opinion  of  the  Episcopal  succession  in  Scot- 
land 298 
Sectaries— described  by  Dr.  Campbell  3^2 
Separation — in  some  cases  necessary  9 
Sharp,  Archbishop,  and  others  consecrated  at  London  in  1661             264 
Sherlock,  Bishop,  quoted                                                            63,  65,  117 
Sincerity — how  far  to  be  depended  on                                                       326 
Skinner,  Rev.  John — his  ecclesiastical  history  quoted           249,  263,  297 
Solemn  league  and  covenant — for  the  abolition  of  Episcopacy              263 
Stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God— how  appointed                           79 — 81 
■■                          — — . — .  mistakes  with  regard  to  their  ap- 
pointment                                                                                                 82 
Taylor,  Bishop — on  the  antiquity  of  Episcopacy                             242,  244 

—J — — on  ordination  284 

TertuUian  quoted  and  misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell         128,  157,  180 

— — translated  by  Bingham,  whom  Dr.  Campbell  quotes  unfairly  157 

his  sentiments  fairly  stated  158,  160,  202,  209 


Test — referred  to  by  Dr.  Campbell,  as  a  coarse  implement  117 

Testimony  of  the  fathers — how  far  to  be  depended  on  161 

-., fairly  appealed  to  256 

Theodoret  quoted  142 
Timothy — charge  given  to  him  as  bishop  of  the  church  in  Ephesus     139 

■        — —  his  ordinatioii  misrepresented  by  Dr.  Campbell  140 

Timothy  and  Titus — how  considered  as  evangelists  144 

Titus  left  in  Crete  with  Episcopal  authority  142 

Vincentius  Lirinensis  quoted  244 

Wake,  Archbishop — his  translation  of  Ignatius'  epistles  quoted  168 

■    '    ■      his  vindication  of  these  epistles  177- 

Wall,  Mr. — 'dUthoY  of  Iftfant  Baptism,  quoted  .  324 

Way  of  salvation — no  new  discovery  -     56 

Westminster — Confession  of  Faith,  quoted  by  Dr.  Campbell  132 

Zacharias— how  inspired  at  the  birth  of  JoImi  the  baptist  39 


THE  END. 


BOOKS 

Printed  and  sold  by  T.  ^  J,  SWORDS,  No,  160  Pearl-Street, 

NetV'Tork. 

1.  Dissertations  on  the  Prophecies   which   have 

remarkably  been  fulfilled,  and  at  this  Time  are  fulfilling  in  the 
World.  By  Thomas  Newton,  D.  D.  late  Lord  Bishop  of 
Bristol. 

!2.   A  Companion  for  the  Festivals  and  Fasts  of  the 

Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America. 
Principally  selected  and  altered  from  NehorCs  Companion  for 
the  Festivals  and  Fasts  of  the  Church  of  England.  By  John 
Henry  Hobart,A,M,  an  Assistant  Minister  of  Trinity  Church, 
New- York.  To  which  are  added,  Pastoral  Advice  to  Young 
Persons  before  and  after  Confirmation,  by  a  Minister  of  the 
Church  of  England  ;  and  an  Exhortation  to  Family  Prayer, 
by  Bishop  Gibson ;  with  Forms  of  Devotion. 

3.  A  Guide  to  the  Church,  in  several  Discourses: 

To  which  are  added,  two  Postscripts :  the  first  to  those 
Members  of  the  Church  who  occasionally  frequent  other 
Places  of  Public  Worship  ;  the  second  to  the  Clergy.  Ad- 
dressed to  William  WUberforce^  Esq.  M.  P.  By  the  Rev. 
Charles  Daubeny,  L.  L.  B.  a  Presbyter  of  the  Church  of 
England. 

4.  The   Catechism   of  the    Protestant   Episcopal 

Church  in  the  United  States  of  America.  To  which  is  an- 
nexed, a  Catechism,  designed  as  an  Explanation  and  En- 
largement of  the  Church  Catechism  :  Recommended  by  the 
Bishop  and  Clergy  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
State  of  New-York.     The  third  Edition. 

5.  An  Exposition  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 

and  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and 
Ceremonies  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States  of  America.  By  the  Rev.  Andreiv  Fozvler,  A.  M. 
Rector  of  St.  Bartholomew's  Parish,  South-Carolina.  The 
second  Edition,  with  Additions  and  Improvements. 

6.  A  Collection  of  the  Essays  on  the  Subject  of 

Episcopacy,  which  originally  appeared  in  the  Albany  Centi- 
nel,  and  which  are  ascribed  principally  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Limiy 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Beasleij,  and  Thomas  T,  Hoxv,  Esq.  With  ad- 
ditional Notes  and  Remarks. 

7.  An  Apology  for  Apostolic  Order  and  its  Ad- 
vocates, occasioned  by  the  Strictures  and  Denunciations  of 
the  Christian's  Magazine.  In  a  Series  of  Letters,  addressed 
to  the  Rev.  John  M,  Mason,  D.  D.  the  Editor  of  that  Work. 

.  By  the  Rev.  John  Henry  Hohart,  an  Assistant  Minister  of 
Trinity  Church.     Judge  righteous  judgment.     John  vii.  24. 


Books  pi*inted  and  sold  by  T»  ^  y.  Swords* 

8.  Two  Letters  to  the  Editor  of  the  Christianas 

Magazine.  By  a  Churchman*  Be  calm  in  arguing^  for 
fierceness  makes  error  a  faulty  and  truth  discourtesy,  Herbert. 
— Refellere  sine  pertinacia^  et  refelli  sine  iracundia^  pariti 
sumus.     Cicero. 

9.  An  Attempt  to  familiarize  the  Church  Cate- 
chism. For  the  Use  of  Schools  and  Families.  By  Mr3* 
Trimmer.    First  American,  from  the  third  London  Edition. 

10.  An  Abridgement  of  Scripture  History;  con- 
sisting of  Lessons  selected  from  the  Old  Testament.  For 
the  Use  of  Schools  and  Families.     By  Mrs*  Trimmer, 

IL  The  Christian  Institutes;  or,  the  sincere  Word 
of  God.  Being  a  plain  and  impartial  Account  of  the  whole 
Faith  and  Duty  of  a  Christian.  Collected  out  of  the  Writ- 
ings of  the  Old  and  New  Testament :  digested  under  proper 
Heads,  and  delivered  in  the  Words  of  Scripture.  By  the 
Right  Reverend  Father  in  God  Francis^  late  Lord  Bishop  of 
Chester.  The  frst  American^  from  the  twelfth  London  Edi- 
tion, 

12.  An  Apology  for  the  Bible,  in  a  Series  of  Let- 
ters, addressed  to  Thomas  Paine^  Author  of  a  Book  entitled. 
The  Age  of  Reason,  Part  the  Second,  being  an  Investigation 
of  True  and  of  Fabulous  Theolog}^  By  R,  Watson^  D.  D. 
F.  R.  S.  Lord  Bishop  of  Landaff,  and  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity  in  the  University  of  Cambridge. 

13.  Discourses  on  several  important  Subjects.     By 

the  late  Right  Rev.  Samuel  Seabury^  D.  D.  Bishop  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  States  of  Connecticut  and 
Rhode-Island.  Published  from  Manuscripts  prepared  by  the 
Author  for  the  Press. 

14.  The  Lite  of  Samuel  Johnson,  D.  D.  the  first 

President  of  King's  College,  in  New- York.  Containing 
many  interesting  Anecdotes  ;  a  general  View  of  the  State  of 
Religion  and  Learning  in  Connecticut  during  the  former  Part 
of  the  last  Centur\';  and  an  Account  of  the  Institution  and 
Rise  of  Yale  College,  Connecticut ;  and  of  King's  (now  Co- 
lumbia) College,  New- York.  By  Thomas  Bradbury  Chand- 
ler^ D.  D.  formerly  Rector  of  St.  John's  Church,  Elizabeth- 
Town,  New- Jersey.  To  which  is  added,  an  Appendix,  con- 
taining many  original  Letters,  never  before  published,  from 
Bishop  Berkeley,  Archbishop  Seeker,  Bishop  Lowth,  and 
others,  to  Dr.  Johnson. 

15.  The  Life  and  Posthumous  Writings  of  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Esq.  with  an  Introductory  Letter  to  the  Right 
Honourable  Earl  Cowper.     By  William  Hayley^  Esq. 


